User talk:IdeArchos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia:No original research; that's at last a partial answer to your question. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Alright. I am not the type to keep anything going longer then it ought. I am sorry for having it all capitals, I was just shocked since I have assistend in editing the whole WiNN mess, and as a philosophy, many of the people I put theire do have an association with aspects of cosmotheism, especially H. G. Wells, Vernadsky and Fr. Chadrin, and the references to the Collective Conscious and Unconscious, the global brain, and the Noosphere/Omega Point seemed highly analogous to each-other. But, I will stop at here for now. Again, I am sorry for the capitals, I was just shocked.

I would also like to know, why is the pantheism article on the pantheism discussion board, and why are there administrators keeping it there? WiNN told me that it was there so that theire could be some retooling decisions, or something like that, I do not know if I can trust him fully though...

IdeArchos 01:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I've just realised that I replied without fully understanding what you were asking about; sorry. You were referring to the disambiguation page, weren't you? The point is that a disambiguation page is there just as a navigation deice; when a word has more than one use, and there's more than one Wikipedia article that people might be looking for, we make a page to act as a signpost. The convention is that it contains the minimum material to achieve that end; details (and further connections) are found in the individual specific articles to which it points. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spherical earth

Were you aware that Eratosthenes (about whom Wikipedia has virtually no information) demonstrated during the third century B.C. that the earth was spherical, and even made a fairly accurate measurement of its size? --HK 07:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't know the context of this comment, but the Greeks had known that the Earth was spherical for some time before that. The myth that people thought that the Earth was flat until Columbus' voyages stems from a nineteenth-century German novel, which was incredibly popular in its day but is virtually forgotten now. One of those things that people think that they know but is actually completely false (like the idea that human beings only use 10% of their brains, which was made up for a 1950s advert on U.S. television). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:33, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bad manners

Why do you insult the citizens of other countries? Imagine someone had a user box like yours on the EU and UN on the US or Nepal. It's just bad manners. ROGNNTUDJUU! 20:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Which nation are you affiliated with and give your defense. -- IdeArchos 08:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Which of the nations mentioned are you affiliated with (NOTE: Every userbox mentioned can be found in the catagories, I did NOT make them up, they are legitimate, and yes, I did have an anti-EU box up allready so I have that covered also). -- IdeArchos 08:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I do not see any reason why I should tell you which nations I am affiliated with nor why I need a "defense" for telling you that crossing out official symbols that represent hundreds of millions of people is bad manners. The anti-EU userbox cannot be found among the official userboxes because policy is not to use divisive boxes. That is why some users make it up on their own. Please express your legitimate concerns in a respectful way. ROGNNTUDJUU! 12:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I see you have been doing this allot.

My reasons against the E.U.? Well, as a Hungarian friend revealed to me, many of the nations of Europe are varied, not merely culturally, but monetarily, this means that:

• Whatever prices are set up in the E.U. will not look kindly upon their new states, who can not afford basic servaces. Their could be redistribution from the E.U. governance, but that issue will have have to waite for below.

• And this is just auxilary to the main problem, significant cultural and language barriers. We are dealing with a lnd that countains 4 different Romantic languages (French being the oddest man out, because it superficially resembles any of the others), Germanic Languages, including English (North and Southern Germanic Languages also are very different from Each-other, a Norsk and a German would not be able to understand each-other very well), and the Slavic Languages.

• Ontop of all this, not all the countries like each-other that much, some very little (Germany is anti-England since WWI, and England and France are practically anti-everybody).

All three of these reasons show, on a practical, immediate basis, why the E.U. is a very risky decision, given that we are dealing with cultures that have developed very distinct from each-other, to the point where compatibility (and particularl scale, as applied to economics) is limited. This underlies another problem, who is to actually set policy in the E.U.?

• It is shown, particularly in the case of the codex scare last year (here, here, and relevant material here) it is likely that the E.U. will be highly corporate based, particularly by Pharmeceutical giants like Bayer and IG Farben.

• National Interests: Where is this new government to be based, and which countries are investing upon this project?

You see, I am not Anti-European, which is what you appear to be implying, infact, as you can see, I care more for Europe then those who plan on turning it into a degenerated Corporate Beaurocracy State (Corporate Socialism, or, fascism). -- 69.248.43.27 20:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I cannot see the point of your price argument. Of course prices can vary, even if they are in the same currency. Do you think the prices are the same in NYC and in Milwaukee? Furthermore, the EU does not force any member countries to join the EURO, Sweden and the UK are no members. The EU does not even allow all countries to join, they need to qualify. What is the problem with having several languages in a political entity? The EU has been extremely helpful in boosting translation services. Should India vanish just because not all its citizens understand each other? Germany is not anti-England at all. Polls show respect for each other is very high in the European Union. The UK as an island is a bit of an outlier, and still respect is comparatively high. Policy is set by individual countries except for the cases they agree about to be handled more appropriately together. Just as in other unions as the UK or US. There is lobbyism in all countries, that is nothing particular to the EU. The "government" is mainly based in Brussels, and I cannot see why that should be a problem. Is the US a problem because Washington D.C. is the capital? Come on.

I set up a template: {{user respect}} ROGNNTUDJUU! 21:02, 5 March 2006 (UTC)