User talk:Morgan Leigh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1


Welcome!

Hello 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! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Ragib 05:34, 15 August 2005 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Future history scan

Hi Morgan; I noticed the scan of Image:Future history 01.jpg from Heinlein. Unfortunately I don't think the copyright has expired -- Heinlein only died 20 years ago, and I think Wikipedia's policy is 100 years. Anyway, before I put a copyright problem tag on, I thought I'd check with you to see if you have a reason I don't know about to believe that the copyright has expired. Let me know on my talk page if there's something, otherwise I'll probably tag it for someone to look at in the next day or two. Thanks. Mike Christie 02:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I will be the first to admit to a great deal of confusion on the whole copyright issue. I am not in the US and as such am not conversant with US copyright law. I know that in my country this image would be able to be used as fair use - as I believe wikipedia would constitute educational use and because it is a tiny part of the entire published work i.e. it is one page of a 256 page book, and also as public domain - as it is 80 years since it was published. I suggest you tag the image and get someone who knows a lot more about this than I do to settle this issue. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Morgan Leigh 04:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC) - cross posted to user talk:Mike Christie


[edit] The Society of Inner Light

Hi, many thanks for welcoming my suggestion at Dion Fortune. Furthermore, please look at The Society of Inner Light: I reverted the deletion that the author him/herself has done. I am not able for now to check the factual verifiability of the information, so please accept my apologies if I did something wrong. --''clearcontent'' a.k.a. '''Doktor Who''' 03:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

That page does contain some erroneous information and some parts of it have been lifted verbatim from other websites. I will put it on my list of things to improve...
Morgan Leigh 07:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)



[edit] Help with Latin

Hello, could you give a look at Per capita, Per capita income, relevant talk/history pages and my talk page? I assert that the original form is 'pro capite, as I can find in a number of books here at my home. --''clearcontent'' a.k.a. '''Doktor Who''' 03:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I have done a bit of research and added my comments to the per capita and per capita income pages.
Morgan Leigh 05:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Just to let you know, I removed Category:Occult after making Category:Kabbalah as subcategory of Category:Occult. As I am sure you know, an article should not also be in a supercategory of its approriate subcategory. -999 (Talk) 19:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I wasn't aware that Kabbalah was a sub category of occult. Sorry.
Morgan Leigh 01:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hermetic Qabalah article

Hey, I noticed you said you were working on a new Hermetic Qabalah article. That sounds great, and I'd be happy to help with any areas I'm familiar with. Thanks for your work! Fuzzypeg 22:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Greetings Fuzzypeg,
I am in fact still working on an Hermetic Qabalah page. Honest. I have been slowed down a bit on account of writing my thesis. I welcome your kind offer of assistance. The method I have been using to construct the page was to make a copy of the existing Kabbalah page in my sandbox and edit it to form an Hermetic Qabalah page. Take a look at my sandbox and you will see what I mean. The page presently contains the material I want to keep in the Hermetic Qabalah page at the top and the remains of the existing Kabbalah page at the bottom. I have been working through the Kabbalah page and either discarding or editing the material to suit Hermetic Qabalah. Please note the stuff at the top is really only a draft, though I am happy with some of it. Let me know what you think.
Morgan Leigh 01:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hermetic Qabalah

Please don't post messages with such an uncivil tone on my talk page again. IPSOS (talk) 13:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

My post to you was not uncivil. Besides if you are going to have a user page as confrontational as yours you need to be able to cope if people respond in a less than enthusiastic way. The fact that your only response to my post was to complain about my tone and not to actually address the issues I raised tells me you are not to be taken seriously. Get over it.
Morgan Leigh 23:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it was. Please see WP:CAT and WP:AGF. I know what I'm doing. My response about the article is on the article talk page where it belongs. IPSOS (talk) 00:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, you made me laugh. WP:AGF says "This page in a nutshell: Assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it." Your user page says "The main problem with Wikipedia is that complete fools cribbing from books consider themselves the equals of people who have studied a field and are intimately acquainted with it." All I shall say is, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Morgan Leigh 04:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ARI

You might want to look at what's going on at Ayn Rand Institute. ThAtSo 16:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Library of Alexandria

Why did you restore speculation about where the Alexandrine texts would have gone if they had survived the 700s? Since the texts did not then why include speculation?Rastov 19:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hermeticism

What I intended to say to the anonymous user was that he did not need to remove all the old information, and references, in order to add the other interpretation. As I say I intended to say this on the article talk page, in response, to his earlier messages, but then got distracted. I am not in favour of simply reverting edits without explanation, especially in the case of a new user who is really attempting an improvement. As I say, I simply got distracted, and forgot to leave the message. Thanks for your edits. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 01:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair Enough. It just ended coming across a bit hostile and the poor newbie seems to have taken it a bit hard. I am sure you meant well and hopefully they will get over it. Morgan Leigh | Talk 02:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Drewermann books.

Re the paragraph you put back in Neurotheology. It's spam: it doesn't give any facts from the books and is only referencing that the "monumental", "radical", "sweeping" book by a "prominent" theologian exists. Why do you think that marketese paragraph is encyclopedic? -- Jeandré, 2007-12-11t12:30z

Greetings Jeandre, I agree that the language is promotional, but the book seems worth mentioning, though perhaps it would be better to pick an English language title by this author for English Wikipedia. I was in a bit of a hurry at the time I made this edit so instead of rewording it I just put it back in. A bit slack I know, but there it is. :) For future reference this kind of question really belongs on the article's discussion page rather than on a user talk page. Morgan Leigh | Talk 22:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sumer

Re: "all the features needed to qualify fully as a civilization" - i removed this sentence, because i could not find any credible source listing "all the features to qualify as civilization". where do you found it? (Unmet (talk) 21:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC))

Greetings Unmet, There is a large body of social science on this topic. Naturally some authors regard different criteria as more important than others. You might like to take a look at Civilization#Characterising_civilization to help you to get an understanding of the topic. For future reference this type of question really belongs on the article's discussion page rather than on a user page. Morgan Leigh | Talk 22:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kabbalah image

Let me explain. I have had a discussion with another user who uploaded an image of the "tree of life" symbol with arbitrary lines highlighted to make it resemble a hemp leaf. Predictably, the image has been deleted as original research and crackpottery. In turn, he brought attention to the image Image:Tree of life wk 02.jpg, which is the same (or similar) symbol with different arbirary lines highlighted to make it resemble a lightning/a flaming sword. Indeed I could have highlighted any set of lines to make it resemble some object. (To demonstrate my point to the user, I said that should I connect points 6-3-1-2-6-9-10, it'll resemble a kite [the flying device, not the bird], or perhaps a tadpole.)

Okay, there is some connection between the Tree of life and an angel with a flaming sword guarding the garden of Eden, but I believe that Wikipedia should include the actual kabbalistic symbol, and not your creative interpretation of it. (Was the symbol depicted anywhere with these particular lines highlighted? You don't cite give any source for it in the image description page.)

That's why I have been replacing it. (In hindsight, I should have brought attention to it somewhere first.) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 09:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mike, While I sympathize with your problem, I do wish you had asked first as this image is not a creative interpretation and the lines are not arbitrary. The flaming sword is an integral part of kabbalistic theology and this image is used a great many times in a great many sources, which is why I made this image and why it was selected for use for the kabbalah portal. The flaming sword represents the the natural order of the sephirot on the tree of life and the path of the descent of the shekinah. Ordinarily I would be able to cite numerous references for this but presently I am traveling and don't have access to my library, however from memory (I am an academic in this area and remember such things as page numbers etc) it can be found on p62 of "The Golden Dawn" by Israel Regardie and Gershom Scholem mentions it in a great many of his works. I request that you replace the image as it represents concepts common to all schools of kabbalah, which the image you have replaced it with does not. The reason for this is that the arrangement of the paths on the tree are different in different schools of kabbalah and the image you have replaced it with applies to a particular variety of kabbalah only. Once I return home (next week) I can provide many citations. Thanks. Morgan Leigh | Talk 11:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)