User talk:The Fading Light

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, The Fading Light, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 01:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Helpme Tag

Yes, what do you need help with? GofG ||| Contribs 02:11, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

How do you create a link to a category without the page being linked becomming part of the category? (example I wish to create a link from my user page to my new project, Category:Dead Scientologists.) The Fading Light

Like so, [[:Category:Dead Scientologists]] Category:Dead Scientologists. Gflores Talk 02:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Kant

Dear friend, thank you for your comment regarding kant. i am afraid i can be of little help since i know rather few things about his philosophy. nevertheless, i would like to stress particularly two points: a) Kant is famous for advocating Sapere aude and for defending the idea that everyone should think for himself. b) i admit that his moral philosophy is rather complicated and that he advocated that ppl should act according to universal moral laws- however, he was against determinism and he regarded men as autonomous beings.--Greece666 14:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Uncivil remark on Talk:Ayn Rand

It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks!

As per policy, I have stricken your remark. Please feel free to restore a civil version of it. Al 17:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Violations

You violated WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL on Objectivism (Ayn Rand). As per policy, I removed your attacks. Al 05:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy

You have clarified that your request for comment "Also is it allowable to not even USE sources when including Objectivism?" is actually about List of groups referred to as cults. There is no discussion of this on the talk page. Start by discussing it on the talk page with the other editors of that article. There is no discussion on the talk page about this, so it is inappropriate for RFC. GRBerry 17:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Randian is "hate speech"?

Whuh? Deleuze 15:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

"Randian" is just a term used to refer to a follower of Ayn Rand. I fail to see how a simple descriptive statement can be hate speech. Nobody used the word Randroid. Anyway, I think you misunderstand the nature of the phrase you deleted - the specific claim is that Rand's group had cult-like elements, not that objectivism in itself is cult-like. Deleuze 15:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
The comparison of a word used solely to demonize and dehumanize people for a trait they cannot control with a factual description of a political ideology is patently absurd. "Randian" refers to someone who follows Rand. Is "Cartesian," then, similarly a slur? Deleuze 15:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No Personal Attacks

Regarding edits such as this: [1]; Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Paul Cyr 23:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Objectivism and Pseudoreligion

I have a disagreement with another editor as to whether or not Objectivism belongs in the pseudoreligion article. I was wondering if you're interested in giving your input. Thanks. LaszloWalrus 04:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology dispute

The link from List_of_publications_in_philosophy#Epistemology to Introduction_to_Objectivist_Epistemology article was removed and I'm in mediation trying to get it back. You can see what what's been happening at Talk:List_of_publications_in_philosophy#mediation and the two sections above this one. The last argument made was that I seemed to be the only person that objected to the removal of the link. I'm hoping that I'm not the only one. SteveWolfer 05:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture on your userpage

Just so you know, your "All Hail the Crimson King" image is covering up several of the userboxes on your userpage. On my 1024x768 display, at least; yours might be different. CameoAppearance 22:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Degrassi

Sorry, the proper spelling for Dylan and Paige's surname is MICHALCHUK. I've reverted your edit accordingly. Cheers. L0b0t 00:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The name which I replaced the incorrect one with had an actual article written in it while the other didn't, now tell me which one is more correct? The Fading Light 01:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't change the spelling of Michalchuk. L0b0t 02:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Milwaukee Police Association

Regardless of what one thinks about the MPA or its election of officer, the MPA article is about the union local, not the local's president and his history. To maintain NPOV, I've reverted your change (which was not a "minor" edit), since the information involved is available in two linked articles. --Orange Mike 21:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I resent the suggestion that I am sympathetic to homophobes or homophobia, as you imply in your note on my talk page (an accusation grotesque to those who know my record in Milwaukee). I am simply trying to keep POV out of the article on the MPA. --Orange Mike 14:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] a call for comments

On the Talk:List of philosophers born in the twentieth century page at the bottom of the section on Rand and on the Template talk:Philosophy navigation page, near the very bottom, is a request for comments - I hope you will take the time to express your views. Steve 18:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] randianism

you should never ever edit another person's post. it does not matter what you think or want to argue. it is just not done. you should return that. --Buridan 03:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

actually, i do have the right to tell you what the rules are when you flagrantly break them. for talk page rules see: [[2]] --Buridan 13:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I suspect that this will come up again and again for this particular comment on this particular page. Not that long ago I made changes to those comments as well. And for the similar reasons - 1) the comments invite changes (it asks people to make additions), 2) the comments elevate themselves to 'criteria' which makes them open to editing. I ended up deciding to never change another's comments, but at the same time recognizing that no one has the right to set criteria others are forced to follow by entering comments on a talk page. A person can't have it both ways. And the creator of a page doesn't 'own' it or have any special rights or powers. Steve 17:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] kindly don't threaten

'you are on very thin ice right now' is not acceptable. --Buridan 11:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Messalina.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Messalina.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] RfC on User Steve Wolfer

First, I'll apologize for an making a presonal request here on your talk page.

Simoes along with Buridan have initiated a Request for Comment on me. The request asks that I be admonished to "refrain from editing philosophy-related lists". I believe that I've tried to follow WP policy and tried to be civil in my attempts to add Rand to the various philosophy lists. I am hoping that others will add quietly reasoned evidence in my behalf. I'll try to post this on other talk pages - not just those familiar with Rand, but those who are comfortable making reasonable judgements. If you know of any users, feel free to repost this to their pages. I will have to go out to that page and defend myself like a kid sent to the principals office. How awful that feels! Best wishes, Steve 23:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the support! That was one of the stranger experiences of my life. An anon IP user came along and deleted Rand from the 20th century philosophy page - This was after Simoes had said he was withdrawing from that RfC. So, I went out and retored her name, but this time I put extensive sources for her in a 'Note' section I added to the bottom and put small, superscript footnote references after her name. Guess what happened - KSchutte, who usually isn't that bad, immediately deleted the references, (but not Rand) - said they were 'bizarre' - go figure! Don't put sources on the page, you get RfC'ed, do put sources on the page, they get deleted. I was really glad someone else signed under my reply. Best Wishes, Steve 16:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/e/User_talk%7EThe_Fading_Light_b172.html"