User talk:Snowded
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Created first archive period to 29th May 2008
Contents |
[edit] Big changes
As you see I have made some sweeping changes to Philosophy. I have tried to avoid the contentious bits, apart from the branches (but that was always part of the original). In addition, happy to change the 'wedded' bit. Well, not happy, but, you know. I'm off to watch the news. Peter Damian (talk) 20:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- PS On seeing your userbox: this user has a rotary dial telephone. Still works. Peter Damian (talk) 21:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] British Isles
Ya know, I thought about saying that (..never speechless..). But, seeing as Matt's currently annoyed with me? I thought better of it. GoodDay (talk) 18:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, and I lost the rag with him on his talk page (and GoodDay's). And here's me with an even temper! Jack forbes (talk) 18:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Matt's view of me, is of little significants, (unless he chooses to somehow have me blocked for something). My instinct is to nominate the BI page for protection again. GoodDay (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome. GoodDay (talk) 19:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] "discussion at Matts"
Hello Snowded, I don't know if you have been follwing the "discussion" between Matt Lewis and myself where he accused me of being exactly the same as Wikipeire. I don't want to get you involved, but I need to ask you one question. Do you think he is right? If he is I might as well pack it in now, but perhaps I can't see things as clearly as everyone else. Jack forbes (talk) 08:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] philosophy
According to Roberts' Rules of Order, a motion to call for the question is always in order.
It seems to me that everyone involved has said everything they have to say on the subject at least twice, and that the current spate of sarcasm, hurt feelings, and insults is not moving the subject forward. Of course, if at a later date somebody comes up with the mot juste, further change is always possible. Nothing on Wikipedia is final. Rick Norwood (talk) 14:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for that Snowded. I probably allowed myself to get dragged into a bit of a brawl with constant accusations being thrown at me. What he does'nt know is that I've got too much respect for Wales to use it to get my own way on another article. I am going to take at least a month off and maybe I'll think differently after that. Thanks again! Jack forbes (talk) 14:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] England/ Wales/ Scotland/ N. Ireland
Hallo, I thought that I'd contact you here, rather than add to the rapidly expanding page. Not everything on Wikipedia is correct, as the information uploaded is provided by people like you and me. Northern Ireland IS part of the U.K. but not part of Britain, so why would you call a person from Northern Ireland British? I was merely trying to raise a point that Chinese people come from China, Egyptians from Egypt, Swedish from Sweden but it doesn't work with U.K. People are called something else, usually by their country of origin; English, Welsh etc. This being the case, weakens, in my mind, at least, the case for the kingdom being a country. I am not saying (at least, I hope that I have not said) definitively, that this is the case but I have never known it to be one but a nation of peoples from a group of countries. I am yet to be convinced otherwise. Perhaps, when I have had time to read through the virtual reams of posts, I may concede. I do love a good debate! (Zippstar (talk) 19:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC))
Hallo, again. I do have knowledge of history and if you look at my post, which was more of a question trying to find some kind of accord, you will see that I did state that I am new to this and hadn't had time to read through everything which had been written. I had also observed that the debate had been taken in a direction I did not wish to go, so I was quite clear about what I was querying, hoping that I might get an answer, sooner, rather than however long it might take me to read all that had been written. I was, however, met with hostility and forced to take a defensive position, which was not what I had wanted at all. Seeing how quickly this was developing, I took the debate off the page and directly to the people who had responded, trying to keep things light hearted - hence the comment about loving a good debate - but still questioning. This has obviously not been your perception and as I said before, just because something is on Wikipedia, it does not make it correct; Wikipedia is, in fact, notorious for being inaccurate and unreliable. I also tried to show that I am not someone who is always right. I have never known the U.K. as a country but as a nation of countries (see nation), so when I saw the article, to my mind, it was incorrect. Was I wrong to ask the question? I don't believe so, particularly as I see people often confusing the U.K., Great Britain, the British Isles and the constituent countries and was seeking clarity. I am sorry if I upset you but if we did not question, Wikipedia would have no place at all. Please, feel free to contact me any time. I am always asking questions (Zippstar (talk) 00:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC))
- I did read alot of what has been written and I did explain that I hadn't read everything and apologised for any duplication but what I did read did not pertain specifically to my query, which is why I raised it. Perhaps I am a little sensitive but given how clearly I thought I had explained myself, I was a little surprised at my reception. (Zippstar (talk) 12:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC))
