User talk:Amicuspublilius
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Downing street memo, authenticity
The veracity of the document as the minutes of the meeting has been independently verified by mulitple government sources. That the text reproduced in The London Times publication is the actual text of the minutes of the meeting is not in question. Kevin Baastalk: new 18:01, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
- If this is true, put it in the article, but CITE CITE CITE! I haven't heard any of this, so I'm skeptical. But if you have the citations to "verification" by "multiple government sources" (US? UK? Who knows?) then put it in there. Amicuspublilius 03:56, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Science pearls
Hello,
Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks,APH 11:23, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
- Hi,
- Thanks for the entry you added. Can you give a short description of "Community and Civil Society" and write of its importance?APH 06:35, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Native Latin speakers?
Greetings, fellow Latinist. If you have second, please cast your two cents in on the discussion of a category for native Latin speakers who are also Wikipedians. --Flex 13:00, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] An Invitation
| You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity
The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented. |
 |
If you're still around, check it out. A.J.A. 00:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vicipaedia Latina
Iustinus Amico Publilio spd,
Adhucine Vicipaediae Latinae contribuere morosus es? Scio multa, immo plurima corrigenda esse, sed quo plures usores Latinitate callidissimi, eo citius ameliorabitur! --Iustinus 00:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have to confess that I've mostly been away from the Latin wikipedia for the last several months, for the same reason that you took so long to answer. So even if I am a little out of touch, and need to be sucked back in myself, here are some places that look like good starting points:
- Unfortunately it looks like la could really use people like us right now. --Iustinus 17:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Translations
Hi, Amicuspublilius! Could you help me translating the following texts to Latin? Allan Kardec and Spiritismo. Arges 13:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, it would be great! Someone already started this translation this translation, while the other one hasn't been started yet. Arges 14:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome to WikiProject Catholicism!
Hello, Amicuspublilius, and welcome to Wikiproject Catholicism! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a Catholic Project Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your edits. Again, welcome, and happy editing! -- MamaGeek TALK CONTRIB 11:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikiproject Catholicism Assessment
Hello, fellow WikiProject Catholicism member. The project has recently begun work on assessing articles relating to Catholicism, and you are invited to comment and participate. The subpage for this assessment is located here. Thank you. —Mira 07:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your edit...
...was pretty funny.[1] I wonder how long it will last. —Mira 22:13, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Psychology Wiki
Hi Amicus,
I noticed that you are a Professor in philosophy, and thought you might be interested in this project which I am involved in, The Psychology Wiki.
I won't say too much, as I'd like you to judge it for yourself, but you should find that it is different from Wikipedia, because approximately 90% of our contributors so far are psychologists, academics, or students and trainees.
Its hosted by a company called Wikia, which was founded by Jimmy Wales and Angela Beesley. There are Google Ads on the site, but we dont make money from the project, they're just to pay for the bandwidth, storage and technical support that Wikia give us.
Have a look and see what you think. We really need someone to have a look at our Philosophy section (which is mostly copied from Wikipedia until we attract lots of Philosophy contributors). We do feel that philosophy guides our discipline, and so your input would be very valuable.
Mostly Zen 00:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi again Amicus,
- I am just at the start of categorising philosophy on our Wiki. As I am only an 'armchair philosopher' I am finding it to be somewhat tricky, considering the insane and disorganised approach much of the wikipedia categories have. This is something else we hope to be able to do differently on our project, as by inviting experts from various fields to be our prime contributors, we hope to be able to organise things a little better. Wikipedia is a brilliant project, but its also an interesting experiment in anarchy, and a high level of bureacracy at the same time!
- I was thinking of structuring our philosophy articles along these lines:
(1) Category:Philosophy
- (2) Category:Philosophers
- (3) Category:Philosophers by historical period
- (3) Category:Philosophers by school of thought
- (3) Category:Philosophers by nationality
- (4) Actual philosopher articles
- (2) Category:Schools of Thought
- (3) Existentialism, Idealism, Kantism etc etc etc...
- (4) Sub categories of these schools, I'm afraid my knowledge begins to fail here.
- (5) Actual philosophy articles
- (4) Sub categories of these schools, I'm afraid my knowledge begins to fail here.
- (3) Existentialism, Idealism, Kantism etc etc etc...
- Have a look at our [Category Tree].
I know that looks a little tricky, but it is seriously easier to understand than the current wikipedia categories. Would you like to be in charge of sorting these out? Its a little tricky, and a boring task, but it would mean that eventually our philosophy section would be more organised than wikipedias.
Also, if you know any good contributors to philosophy from wikipedia, whom you trust to edit our article to a high standard, please invite them to join our project. At the moment, we are in the very early stages (6 months since it started) and are still finding our feet, and contributors. We are currently open to anyone, but are finding that only psychologists and the occasional philosopher actually want to contribute. Should we begin to reach the stage where we are attracting contributors that are causing more harm than good, we may revise this, making registration necessary for example.
At the moment we are inviting the experts, like yourself. Psychologists, perhaps more so than other scientists, really value philosophy. We need it to guide our discipline and give it purpose.
I hope you will enjoy contributing to our project
Tom Michael - Mostly Zen 
(talk) 11:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Predestination (Calvinism) vadalism
There was possible vadalism to your submission on Predestination (Calvinism) (Simonapro 08:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC))
[edit] Move Roman Catholic Church to Catholic Church
There is a vote at Talk:Roman Catholic Church: A Vote on the Title of this Article on moving Roman Catholic Church to Catholic Church. You are invited to review it. --WikiCats 04:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Diocesan Infobox
To the creators of Diocesan/Archdiocesan articles
I have proposed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Catholicism an infobox for Catholic Dioceses. I have not gotten any feedback on this proposal, so I’m culling feedback, advice, corrections, etc. for this. If you have the time, would you check out User:SkierRMH/Diocese_Infobox and give me some feedback! Thanks much!!
[edit] Arguments for existence of God
Could really use your help on this. In particular Argument from love and Argument from beauty have been proposed for deletion - today is the last day. If you could look at them I'd be v grateful. NBeale 08:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
