User talk:Whywhywhy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Hi Whywhywhy, welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are a few helpful links to start you off: Avoiding common mistakes, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style, Policies and guidelines, Help, Merging pages.

If you need help or are curious about something, feel free to ask on my talk page or the village pump. You can sign your name and a datestamp on comments using four tildes (~~~~). If you have any further questons, feel free to ask, and I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian! Andre (talk) 03:35, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] 2005 French civil unrest

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs changing, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the Edit this page link. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use out the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 10:55, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Good morning. I meant to drop you a note after the first time, but, well, I guess I got distracted. You've apparently twice now removed the content of the "recent political context" section of the article. How come? It doesn't appear elsewhere and it's important - for instance, according to the talk page the "Kärcher" comment is widely used by the rioters. Additionally, it's the only place where we could fit the the very important note that the rioters are predominantly Muslim but "the mayhem has yet to take on any ideological or religious overtones". --Kizor 10:09, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

trying to politicians "context" is just plain wrong, i keep moving it to the political section but people keep moving it and i am sick of moving back up 2 and people keep leaving it in that section 2 so ima deleting it and it can go in the article. Ima happy with it being in the polictical section iv disucssed it in the discussion which nobody has bothered to read. although i admit the headings have changed slietly since the start of this.--Whywhywhy 10:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
(That was from my talk, I've gotten into the habit of pasting in what I'm replying to so people won't have to flip back and worth between two pages).
I admit that I couldn't make complete sense of that. But if you mean this, plenty of people must've read it, myself included, whether or not they had anything useful to say is another matter.

what you mentioned above is a political response.--Whywhywhy 10:48, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

As the headers stand now, it can't be in the "response" section since the described events happened before the riots. Your complaint about the "recent political context" section, at the moment the "recent context" section, seems to be that it's too long. Well, there's several important points to be made, isn't there? --Kizor 10:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

my point is that it IS all policial see Political--Whywhywhy 10:37, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes it is. It's also an important part of the riots' background. There's no section that all politics about this should go. --Kizor 10:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

look i want a blurb or something but not a heap of political commentray--Whywhywhy 10:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I think I understand your point a little better. But why? It's not political commentary if it's relevant - Rama mentioned in the talk page that "Kärcher" has become a slogan for the rioters, and the part about ethnicity and the like is surely important. Also, it doesn't seem like commentary to me, just reporting. --Kizor 10:44, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

as for the above ill read it again response soon. well then it it happend before the riots then its old news and can go into the article directly

Main article: Social situation in the French suburbs
.--Whywhywhy 10:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

its all political commentary....... commentray is a response just like i am resoponding to all this. Trust me my first language is english thus i understand the stupidity of the language--Whywhywhy 10:54, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Mine, admittedly, is not. So okay then. But the social situation article is NOT about the situation in regards to the riots, but in general. The Kärcher comment would not belong there, and the NY times reference - made directly regarding the riots - does so even less. I have no idea what you mean about politics. There is no section where all politics should go, and something can be political and still quality as context, can't it?
And now I'm off to class. --Kizor 11:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

look by that reasoning everything would be context. create a realted insidents section at the bottem as for the page as for the NY article one min--Whywhywhy 11:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

the NY time is making a political commentary put it their--Whywhywhy 11:18, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

ok i have back down on the NY article i think my placement for this was wrong and so where my thoughts sorry --Whywhywhy 11:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sanitarium Health Food Company

Where do you get these tax break comments from? WHere are your sources? Yes, I am aware that Sanitarium gets tax breaks as a result of charity status. But where is the source? and, keep your grammar clear and avoid breaching NPOV. MyNameIsNotBob 11:08, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for sourcing your comments. I believe things have changed though. I will try and find out what the current situation is. MyNameIsNotBob 00:16, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Talking to myself

I told my doctor that i had broken my leg in 2 places, he responded "well dont go back".

You couldnt think your way out of a paper bag.--Whywhywhy 00:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


  • Karma is in a way connected to this theory I have on ghosts and being able to predict things that are going to happen and what not. I have this theory that along with body language , talking and what not we communicate with each other with out the conscious mind knowing it(messages in messages which contain viruses), Sort of like computer viruses of the brain. These viruses use our brain to do tasks or give us false information like fake or other people’s memory’s and sometimes influence our decisions to affect others. Karma could be a virus that affects everyone and we might do things to others and setup bad karma events for ourselves or for others. I am not really dead set on this or anything it’s just a theory

braunstein: <WHY?> wrote: Karma could be a virus that affects everyone and we might do things to others and setup bad karma events for ourselves or for others. I am not really dead set on this or anything it’s just a theory.

braunstein: interesting idea. reminiscent of burroughs theory that language itself is a virus. you think then that this type of virus operates outside of currently accepted and observable phenomena? what i mean exactly is, what form do you think that it takes? this also leaves open the possibility that some people have the ability (not necessarily known to themselves) to operate outwith karma.

me

braunstein wrote: interesting idea. reminiscent of burroughs theory that language itself is a virus.


If i was to make a comparison between burroughs theory(as i understand it) i would say language in general is a program (we get the choice and are in full knowledge of the message) that sometimes contains viruses that I am trying to explain, although like most things the line I suppose could be blurred, I suppose examples of the line blurring could be branding and subliminal messages although its hard to explain anything more virus like because well if you could the virus wouldn’t work I suppose.

braunstein wrote: you think then that this type of virus operates outside of currently accepted and observable phenomena?

yes maybe

braunstein wrote: what i mean exactly is, what form do you think that it takes?

  • My guess would be the viruses are communicated threw mathematical type communications. Like when you look into someone’s eye the pupils dilatation and speed it resizes. Maybe the way someone breathes and the frequency. The virus’s themselves my override out ability to recognize these communication in themselves making it impossible to record .Sort of like if you sit a certain way around other people or do something like put you hand on your waist you will see others copy subconsciously.

Possible Virus's phenomenas

  • Sleep walking?
  • Cold Shivers
  • Doing things for no apparent reaons
  • Do things like cracking your knuckles at certain times.
  • Dreams
  • Deja vu

Possible Virus's

  • Karma
  • Love
  • Ghosts
  • Deja vu
  • Dreaming the future
  • That feeling you get when something bads about to happen

This is why i like doing abstract shapes and what not. I dont know why i choose to do the shapes the way i do but I know they should be like that.

Have i posted this before?

[edit] More talking

the less violent your revolution is the better the outcome will be for the people. Thats not to say ghandi's method would have beat'n the nazi's.


Quote: The people who protest outside the G8 are lacking a cohesive message.

the reason they dont have a cohesive message is because the media doesnt allow them to have one. When your protesting against everything a media outlet stands for do you think it will be report it fairly? Every body has a diffrent reason for supporting a movement. It all come down to how its framed.

[edit] More

in my opinion if communism came into power we would eventually fall back into the stone age and eventually die out.( over many years )which is my preferred ending Inversely if capitalism keeps it up we will destroy out self’s but with out both we would be still and very bored.

Basically the human race depends on the 2 ideas continually pushing.(now this doesn’t mean war). Bit like a pendulum clock. You stop it wont work You push it to far to the left and it won’t work. You push it to far to the right it won’t work . If it swing 2 violently it will break. Also it can become monotonous if we don’t tweak it a little every now and then Now if only we could figure out what drives this dam clock Wink But eventually it will end as sure as death is for the individual. So I recon have a little fun and lets try see how long we can keep it swinging. thats my theory anyway . ill probably have a new one 2morrow

[edit] Woostercollective.com

Just a note that I've tagged Woostercollective.com for speedy delete - no obvious claim to notability and looks spamish. Sorry. Ben Aveling 11:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for your contributions in the Why We Fight (2005 film) article. Your efforts are appreciated! ;) RememberMe 22:46, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 Tropfest Finalists

Could you remove the caps from the positons on the page please, it really distracts from the page. Bold would work a fair bit better :) -- Tawker 07:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Broadmeadows train station.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Broadmeadows train station.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 23:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

done--Whywhywhy 09:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tash photo

Image:Natasha Stott Despoja Crop.jpg
Cropped version showing the lady clearer

That's not the best photograph in the world. Too much going on and Tash is only a pixel or two in the middle. It's an article about the person, not rallies. Perhaps you could crop it so that it shows her and a sign or two and I think it would work much better in this article. --Surgeonsmate 05:51, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Their is already a photo profiling "tash" on the page so iv included one of her with the "people".--Whywhywhy 05:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC) It's an article about Natasha and if you can barely see her in the photo it's not much use. I've included a cropped version so you can see what I mean. It's more about her but still shows the flavour of the meeting.--Surgeonsmate 06:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Horses.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Horses.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. 07:04, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Child development page

Hi, I see you are in Australia, hope it's not too hot there right now! I've been looking over the Child development article, and the history pages, and seeing as you are the creator & principal editor, I wonder if you could tell me what you used as your primary source/reference. Not even sure you're still active on WP, but if so I'd appreciate a reply, either here or on my talk page. Thanks! Cgingold 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Cfa logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cfa logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Whywefight1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Whywefight1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 03:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Whywefight2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Whywefight2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 03:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/h/y/User_talk%7EWhywhywhy_591c.html"