User talk:BenPhil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

WELCOME!! Hello, BenPhil! I want to personally welcome you on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't already, you can put yourself new user log and list of users so you can be properly introduced to everyone. Don't forget to be bold, and don't be afraid of hungry Wikipedians...there's a rule about not biting newcomers. Some other good links are the tutorial, how to edit a page, or if you're really stuck, see the help pages. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a ♪ at my talk page (by clicking the plus sign (+) next to the tab at the top that says "edit this page")...and again, welcome!--ViolinGirl♪ 16:40, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I forgot to mention! It would be really helpful if you would sign your name on talk pages, so people can get back to you quickly. It's easy to do this by clicking the button (next to the one with the "W" crossed out) one from the end on the left. (It looks like some scribble marks.) If that's confusing, feel free to shout at me for help! See you around!

[edit] Devil's coach horse beetle

Thanks for the great photos of the devil's coach-horse beetle. I couldn't get the one I found in my garden to pose for me and I was really hoping someone would get one of the threat display! Billlion 19:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome Billlion, glad I could help. Ben 13:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Justice

Hi. I notice you made some changes to the 'Justice as divine command' section, as follows (your edit in italics):

Advocates of divine command theory argue that justice, and indeed the whole of morality, is the authoritative command of God. Murder is wrong and must be punished, for instance, because God commands that it be so. This faces the objection that it makes justice arbitrary: God might equally have commanded that murder is just, if he had chosen. The response may be that if God had created a different set of moral values, then these would be so, in place (or as a variation of) our existing values and that justice would be based around them. Furthermore, many views of God in religions rule out the possibility of God changing His mind, thus keeping a consistent view of justice and morality for eternity.

Sorry, but I don't think this is an improvement. First, the sentence beginning 'the response may be' isn't a response, it's a restatement of the previous sentence: the suggestion is that God can command that anything he chooses be just. Second, the possibility or impossibility of God changing his mind (e.g. suddenly deciding tomorrow that murder is just after all) isn't in question: what's at stake here is, could God have decided once and for all that murder would be just? I've put it back the way it was for the moment, but I'm happy to be shown how I'm wrong if you'd like to discuss at the article's talk page. Cheers, Sam Clark 08:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I've replied to you at Talk:Justice. Cheers, Sam Clark 08:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

Hi Ben User:BenPhil/Cheetah is ahowing up on a number of categories. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 11:55 13 September 2006 (GMT).

Sorry Rich, I didn't realise. Problem corrected, thanks for the notification. Ben 12:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cocaine

-- Hi Ben, please before you revised treatment section of cocaine article read [1] (Webdome 02:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC))

Sorry Webdome, I thought I was reverting vandalism, my appologies. Ben (talk) 22:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Your "rv"-edit was a huge bullshit through and through. It had been wise to immediately revert your own edit! – My advise: Get aquainted with the rules of "good" referencing (including the unwritten ones).
It had taken me about SIX to SEVEN HOURs of HARD WORK(!) to reasonably clean up the ref-section and to bring it in an updated fashion in accordance with the wikipedian guidelines. There hasn't been the slightest hint of vandalism! Sorry for being so straight. But would you now do the work to repair that blunder??! –
By the way, PMID is the identnumber of PubMed, which is the worldwide largest database for peer reviewed publications about pharmacol. etc. research, and the first choice of referencing. It's good wp-standard to apply that style, ... and further, to use "et al.", instead of a long chain of author names. --84.136.234.180 01:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Revert it, fine and good if it improves the article. I did not make those changes you claim, I reverted them after a quick review of the changes made by an IP which had vandalised a series of other articles. I made a revert because I thought the changes the IP made were vandalsim, evidently I was wrong and so a simple correction of my edit and a message (see first message above) was all that was necessary, your message was not. I now consider the subject to be closed. Thank you. Ben (talk) 13:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/e/n/User_talk%7EBenPhil_e641.html"