User talk:Wilanthule
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Wilanthule, 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:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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! --Siva1979Talk to me 00:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Wilanthule: Thanks for your defense of my blurb. If you don't know already, you may be interested in
which is going up as a wikibook at
http://openeconomy.davezanni.org
(you many need a password which you can get from davezanni.)
Prestonmcafee 05:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Edit summaries
When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.
When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.
--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Good work.
I just want to briefly thank you for your good work on Ayn Rand. It's a difficult article to improve and there are quite a few very strong-minded editors out there who would like to see it reflect their POV more closely. Despite all this, you've managed to make a significant positive contribution, and I appreciate it. Keep up the good work! Alienus 19:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Ditto. Especially with respect to your response to the peer review comments. Kaisershatner 21:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Philosophical criticism of Ayn Rand
Some of it is cited, such as with "Introduction to Objectivistic Epistemology." If I need the actual page numbers, I could accomodate. However, much of it is written on simple philosophical consensus. For example, I mentioned the civil and professionalized nature of philosophy in the 20th century compared to Rand's resentful attitude towards the philosophical tradition, such as towards Kant. These are simply observations of facts already stated in this article and accepted more generally. Also, I compare Rand's concepts to preexisting concepts such as direct realism, correspondence theory of truth, contingent truth, pragmatism, etc. Other than the fact that I've related those to "Introduction to Objectivistic Epistemology," there's nothing else to cite since they're merely comparisons.
What in particular do you think I should cite? It would be very helpful if you could point them out, since I was merely writing from what I think is a consensus within the realm of analytic philosophy. No philosopher really dignifies Rand with serious philosophical discussion, and I was explaining why. It's hard to cite something when you're basically saying there isn't much philosophical treatment of Rand to cite in the first place, if that makes sense.
