![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
What with the holiday I'm in the mood to goof, but hopefully after today I will resist the temptation to edit.-- T. Anthony 14:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Well now I have reason to make good my pledge of leaving. I have a thesis to write so I have to save my wrists for typing it up. No more typing here if I can help it. I haven't so far, but I really should this time.-- T. Anthony 11:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm planning on limiting this talk page, in least for now, to stuff on Wikipedia that interests me. Hopefully I'll get too busy with my thesis to work here much.-- T. Anthony 12:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
My work is really suffering due to this. Also my reasons for leaving in the past basically remain. Hopefully I shall move on and resist the urge to come back this time.-- T. Anthony 18:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
In case the list and category both get deleted and I decide to go back to recreating articles. I'm only putting people here whose main claim to fame is eccentricity and of whom I can find sources calling them such.
Hi T. Anthony. Well former or not, you still seem to be editing... and whatever your status, you are have earned these WP:SERVICE awards in recognition of your contributions. Herostratus 19:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
And I must say I'm thinking I made a mistake. I'm tempted to go back to calling myself a former again. Still if I stick to small towns or other obscure topics that get few editors I think I'll be fine.-- T. Anthony 10:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
In many respects I still consider myself a "former wikipedian" in that I don't consider myself a Wikipedian and I think Wikipedia on balance does more harm than good. I think there are systemic cultural problems which have not been remedied and in time I decided they can not ever be remedied. I think when it comes to anything concerning politics, religion, and most of the humanities Wikipedia is worse than worthless...Objections aside Wikipedia is fun. If you reject the idea of it as a legitimate source of information, which I mostly do, and just see it as a way to share some obscure stuff you know or researched it's pleasant. Also on areas where the facts are more objective or obscure it does considerably better. This is most true in the case of mathematics and small towns. The coverage of pop-culture and sub-cultures is also extensive. I'm not sure it's coverage of pop-culture is good in the way I once put it, but as it's an area of lesser scholarly interest it is better simply by being so much more extensive. I had that on the main page once, but it's more appropriate here. I removed it briefly, but I think it's something I standby enough I'll keep it on my talk page.(I removed the part about Colbert and concensus as it is a bit more strident than I like)-- T. Anthony 11:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi T. Anthony. I noticed that you have added many changes to the page List of Christian Missionaries, the page I created. Is there any way you could perhaps get the page to appear when you type the words, "List of Christian Missionaries" in the search box? For some reason it doesn't show up. Thanks. Canadia, 10:34, 2 Sept 2006 (UTC)
|
-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
The new location is here: List of critics of Islam . -- Amenra 03:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm enjoying it a bit more now. I mostly just do jazz, small towns, and some articles that are featured in other languages now. I still don't necessarily like the place and I don't believe in it, but I'm feeling mellow on it today anyway.-- T. Anthony 06:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for putting up a good argument. I appreciate your help. Bakaman Bakatalk 00:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I am afraid it is quite hard to separate the "Jewish ethnicity" (whatever it is) from the Jewish religion; see the last comments in the discussion page of Category:Jewish Mathematicians. What we have here is three things:
(a) a religion, which, like a number of other religions, claims that some people who never signed up for it belong to it and will always belong to it, regardless of what they wish or do not wish; in this case, belonging is determined largely by bloodlines; (b) a nation (this is not a term I would use, but, rather, the term used in the article Jew, to which the categories link) consisting of the individuals who belong to the religion; (c) a vaguely applied tag used to denote several different immigrant groups - often migrants from Eastern Europe to the Eastern coast of the US at the turn of the century.
It is impossible to point out (b) without pointing out (a), and that violates the guidelines on living subjects. As for (c) - we ought to have more articles on the general subject, but using a term as a yes-or-no tag in this case is senseless and serves no purpose. (Moreover, it is an invitation to projection and anachronism.) Bellbird 13:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
What with the holiday I'm in the mood to goof, but hopefully after today I will resist the temptation to edit.-- T. Anthony 14:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Well now I have reason to make good my pledge of leaving. I have a thesis to write so I have to save my wrists for typing it up. No more typing here if I can help it. I haven't so far, but I really should this time.-- T. Anthony 11:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm planning on limiting this talk page, in least for now, to stuff on Wikipedia that interests me. Hopefully I'll get too busy with my thesis to work here much.-- T. Anthony 12:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
My work is really suffering due to this. Also my reasons for leaving in the past basically remain. Hopefully I shall move on and resist the urge to come back this time.-- T. Anthony 18:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
In case the list and category both get deleted and I decide to go back to recreating articles. I'm only putting people here whose main claim to fame is eccentricity and of whom I can find sources calling them such.
Hi T. Anthony. Well former or not, you still seem to be editing... and whatever your status, you are have earned these WP:SERVICE awards in recognition of your contributions. Herostratus 19:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
And I must say I'm thinking I made a mistake. I'm tempted to go back to calling myself a former again. Still if I stick to small towns or other obscure topics that get few editors I think I'll be fine.-- T. Anthony 10:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
In many respects I still consider myself a "former wikipedian" in that I don't consider myself a Wikipedian and I think Wikipedia on balance does more harm than good. I think there are systemic cultural problems which have not been remedied and in time I decided they can not ever be remedied. I think when it comes to anything concerning politics, religion, and most of the humanities Wikipedia is worse than worthless...Objections aside Wikipedia is fun. If you reject the idea of it as a legitimate source of information, which I mostly do, and just see it as a way to share some obscure stuff you know or researched it's pleasant. Also on areas where the facts are more objective or obscure it does considerably better. This is most true in the case of mathematics and small towns. The coverage of pop-culture and sub-cultures is also extensive. I'm not sure it's coverage of pop-culture is good in the way I once put it, but as it's an area of lesser scholarly interest it is better simply by being so much more extensive. I had that on the main page once, but it's more appropriate here. I removed it briefly, but I think it's something I standby enough I'll keep it on my talk page.(I removed the part about Colbert and concensus as it is a bit more strident than I like)-- T. Anthony 11:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi T. Anthony. I noticed that you have added many changes to the page List of Christian Missionaries, the page I created. Is there any way you could perhaps get the page to appear when you type the words, "List of Christian Missionaries" in the search box? For some reason it doesn't show up. Thanks. Canadia, 10:34, 2 Sept 2006 (UTC)
|
-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 22:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
The new location is here: List of critics of Islam . -- Amenra 03:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm enjoying it a bit more now. I mostly just do jazz, small towns, and some articles that are featured in other languages now. I still don't necessarily like the place and I don't believe in it, but I'm feeling mellow on it today anyway.-- T. Anthony 06:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for putting up a good argument. I appreciate your help. Bakaman Bakatalk 00:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I am afraid it is quite hard to separate the "Jewish ethnicity" (whatever it is) from the Jewish religion; see the last comments in the discussion page of Category:Jewish Mathematicians. What we have here is three things:
(a) a religion, which, like a number of other religions, claims that some people who never signed up for it belong to it and will always belong to it, regardless of what they wish or do not wish; in this case, belonging is determined largely by bloodlines; (b) a nation (this is not a term I would use, but, rather, the term used in the article Jew, to which the categories link) consisting of the individuals who belong to the religion; (c) a vaguely applied tag used to denote several different immigrant groups - often migrants from Eastern Europe to the Eastern coast of the US at the turn of the century.
It is impossible to point out (b) without pointing out (a), and that violates the guidelines on living subjects. As for (c) - we ought to have more articles on the general subject, but using a term as a yes-or-no tag in this case is senseless and serves no purpose. (Moreover, it is an invitation to projection and anachronism.) Bellbird 13:35, 12 September 2006 (UTC)