Hi Whomyl!! We want to invite you to play The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive game that can help you become a great contributor to Wikipedia. It's a fun interstellar journey, and you'll learn how to edit Wikipedia in about an hour. We hope to see you there! This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend,
HostBot (
talk)
20:14, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
|
Your apparent belief that wholesale reverts are the proper procedure may well fall afoul of the Wikipedia polices concerning living persons WP:BLP, and edit was WP:EW. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 22:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
@ Collect: I agree it is no good to get into bouncing edits back and forth. What is the correct forum to debate these issues? The "Geoism" "talk" page? Here?
I am not opposed to reexamining this list and being more selective, especially with regard to living persons and more speculative connections, but we should debate that elsewhere first; it does not seem efficient for you to just delete whole sections. I'm not sure how to help you improve your edit when it is in that form. Sorry if my ignorance about Wikipedia is causing friction.
PLEASE make sure you have valid RS sources for your additions to "Georgism" -- Many appear unrelated to Henry George and Georgism, and your assertions that they are related does not comport with Wikipedia policies. Recheck every single addition you have made, and give cites from reliable sources directly connecting them with George -- Laffer, for example, I can find zero sources making such a connection, and I suspect that almost all of the additions will have to be removed if unsourced or improperly sourced. DF Nolan also has no proper source for the claim made -- heck essentially none of the added names are sourced. This is not "optional" - unsourced or improperly sourced claims shall be removed. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 14:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Given the dispute, and the likelihood that Michael Hudson has gone in and been taken out of the list of 'economic georgists' several times, it might be wisest to put him in with following parenthesis "(disputed)" C2equalA2plusB2 (talk) 23:07, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georgism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mutualism ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:08, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
That policy requires removal of contentious claims not strongly sourced. I urge you to self-revert pending any actual outcome of the RfC on the talk page. In fact, policy requires that you revert. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 11:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I will temporarily remove it and give people a chance to raise objections. Simply asserting that the sources do not verify the claim is unacceptable though. You will need to provide plausible concerns. Whomyl ( talk) 00:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Covers edit war, and in which you appear to be an avid participant. I urge you to self-revert the material which is being discussed lest any admin decide to block you. The reason for an RfC is to prevent such acts, and your apparent desire not to abide by talk page discussion is troubling. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 22:53, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
You reverted 3000 characters and repeatedly ignored my request to know which portion of my edit you thought was questionable. You also neglect to mention that I already reverted my edit pending an explanation of what you are seeking consensus on. Whomyl ( talk) 23:08, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georgism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Right-of-way ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
On edits you do not like, and about which a talk page discussion exists, is improper. Very improper. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 21:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC) And saying "there is no discussion" is inane here -- in fact it has several posts which should have alerted you - not to mention the prior discussions which said you need to only use sources making links directly to Georgism. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 21:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps you accidentally removed an entire section of the article, including the section heading, and ~7000 characters. If it was in fact an accident, then perhaps an apology is in order but I didn't "Cry vandalism"; I said, "apparently", for I can see no other intentional cause. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Georgism&diff=613139746&oldid=613052297 Whomyl ( talk) 01:47, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Georgism while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of more than one account or IP address by one person. If this was not your intention, then please always remember to log in when editing. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
"George seems to have a way of speaking directly to and inspiring both individualists and socialists."
Indeed. Don't get me wrong, I like George. I like Georgism/geoism. But I do not consider myself a geoist. I typically use the labels libertarian, anarchist, anarchist without adjectives, or left-libertarian (in that order) to describe those philosophies that promote a more egalitarian view of land, but the specific philosophy to which I adhere is called social ecology. I personally think communism and geoism can peacefully coexist—a crucial aspect of anarchism without adjectives—but again, I'm neither a communist nor a geoist. This is the problem I have with identifying others as Georgists just because they said something nice about George or geoism once: one can perceive an economic policy to be better than another without self-identifying as such. I think we need concrete declarations of adherence to geoism before we include names in that article. — MisterDub ( talk | contribs) 15:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georgism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Privileges. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:04, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Classical economics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Hudson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Henry George, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Hudson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:20, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Whomyl. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Robert Stout, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Schwede 66 02:40, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi Whomyl, I wonder if we can have a conversation away from the article. I agree with you that George and other early georgists believed that there should be multiple sources of government income. However, I seem to remember reading that George himself endorsed the term "Single Taxers" as an apt description for the primary political objective of the nascent Georgist movement. Also, I don't have the cites, but I also seem to remember early Georgists agreeing with the political logic of non-rental-capture forms of taxation. For example, an income tax (with a high deductable) and a wealth tax. You have put in the example of seigniorage, which I believe is not best described as a form of rental capture; rather, it's a tax on the holding of money. However, although I consider myself a georgist, I must confess that your readings on these issues are much more extensive than mine. LK ( talk) 06:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Whomyl ( talk) 07:38, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Whomyl—Many thanks for your Georgist contributions to the Tom L. Johnson article. They fit in gracefully, and I should have covered that angle more completely when I wrote it. Here's a question. Georgism was and is often criticised as being 'one-dimensional': with its single-minded concentration on the Single Tax, it never managed to form coherent positions on the other issues of the day. Is that wrong? Tom L. was perhaps the most prominent Georgist to attain office in America, so it seems important to track down just what his Georgism meant in practice, in the everyday business of municipal government. Can you help with this?
Michael Pauls ( talk) 00:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Whomyl. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Whomyl. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi Whomyl!! We want to invite you to play The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive game that can help you become a great contributor to Wikipedia. It's a fun interstellar journey, and you'll learn how to edit Wikipedia in about an hour. We hope to see you there! This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend,
HostBot (
talk)
20:14, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
|
Your apparent belief that wholesale reverts are the proper procedure may well fall afoul of the Wikipedia polices concerning living persons WP:BLP, and edit was WP:EW. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 22:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
@ Collect: I agree it is no good to get into bouncing edits back and forth. What is the correct forum to debate these issues? The "Geoism" "talk" page? Here?
I am not opposed to reexamining this list and being more selective, especially with regard to living persons and more speculative connections, but we should debate that elsewhere first; it does not seem efficient for you to just delete whole sections. I'm not sure how to help you improve your edit when it is in that form. Sorry if my ignorance about Wikipedia is causing friction.
PLEASE make sure you have valid RS sources for your additions to "Georgism" -- Many appear unrelated to Henry George and Georgism, and your assertions that they are related does not comport with Wikipedia policies. Recheck every single addition you have made, and give cites from reliable sources directly connecting them with George -- Laffer, for example, I can find zero sources making such a connection, and I suspect that almost all of the additions will have to be removed if unsourced or improperly sourced. DF Nolan also has no proper source for the claim made -- heck essentially none of the added names are sourced. This is not "optional" - unsourced or improperly sourced claims shall be removed. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 14:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Given the dispute, and the likelihood that Michael Hudson has gone in and been taken out of the list of 'economic georgists' several times, it might be wisest to put him in with following parenthesis "(disputed)" C2equalA2plusB2 (talk) 23:07, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georgism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mutualism ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:08, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
That policy requires removal of contentious claims not strongly sourced. I urge you to self-revert pending any actual outcome of the RfC on the talk page. In fact, policy requires that you revert. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 11:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I will temporarily remove it and give people a chance to raise objections. Simply asserting that the sources do not verify the claim is unacceptable though. You will need to provide plausible concerns. Whomyl ( talk) 00:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Covers edit war, and in which you appear to be an avid participant. I urge you to self-revert the material which is being discussed lest any admin decide to block you. The reason for an RfC is to prevent such acts, and your apparent desire not to abide by talk page discussion is troubling. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 22:53, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
You reverted 3000 characters and repeatedly ignored my request to know which portion of my edit you thought was questionable. You also neglect to mention that I already reverted my edit pending an explanation of what you are seeking consensus on. Whomyl ( talk) 23:08, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georgism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Right-of-way ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
On edits you do not like, and about which a talk page discussion exists, is improper. Very improper. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 21:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC) And saying "there is no discussion" is inane here -- in fact it has several posts which should have alerted you - not to mention the prior discussions which said you need to only use sources making links directly to Georgism. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 21:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps you accidentally removed an entire section of the article, including the section heading, and ~7000 characters. If it was in fact an accident, then perhaps an apology is in order but I didn't "Cry vandalism"; I said, "apparently", for I can see no other intentional cause. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Georgism&diff=613139746&oldid=613052297 Whomyl ( talk) 01:47, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Georgism while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of more than one account or IP address by one person. If this was not your intention, then please always remember to log in when editing. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
"George seems to have a way of speaking directly to and inspiring both individualists and socialists."
Indeed. Don't get me wrong, I like George. I like Georgism/geoism. But I do not consider myself a geoist. I typically use the labels libertarian, anarchist, anarchist without adjectives, or left-libertarian (in that order) to describe those philosophies that promote a more egalitarian view of land, but the specific philosophy to which I adhere is called social ecology. I personally think communism and geoism can peacefully coexist—a crucial aspect of anarchism without adjectives—but again, I'm neither a communist nor a geoist. This is the problem I have with identifying others as Georgists just because they said something nice about George or geoism once: one can perceive an economic policy to be better than another without self-identifying as such. I think we need concrete declarations of adherence to geoism before we include names in that article. — MisterDub ( talk | contribs) 15:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Georgism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Privileges. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:04, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Classical economics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Hudson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Henry George, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Hudson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:20, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Whomyl. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Robert Stout, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Schwede 66 02:40, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi Whomyl, I wonder if we can have a conversation away from the article. I agree with you that George and other early georgists believed that there should be multiple sources of government income. However, I seem to remember reading that George himself endorsed the term "Single Taxers" as an apt description for the primary political objective of the nascent Georgist movement. Also, I don't have the cites, but I also seem to remember early Georgists agreeing with the political logic of non-rental-capture forms of taxation. For example, an income tax (with a high deductable) and a wealth tax. You have put in the example of seigniorage, which I believe is not best described as a form of rental capture; rather, it's a tax on the holding of money. However, although I consider myself a georgist, I must confess that your readings on these issues are much more extensive than mine. LK ( talk) 06:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Whomyl ( talk) 07:38, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Whomyl—Many thanks for your Georgist contributions to the Tom L. Johnson article. They fit in gracefully, and I should have covered that angle more completely when I wrote it. Here's a question. Georgism was and is often criticised as being 'one-dimensional': with its single-minded concentration on the Single Tax, it never managed to form coherent positions on the other issues of the day. Is that wrong? Tom L. was perhaps the most prominent Georgist to attain office in America, so it seems important to track down just what his Georgism meant in practice, in the everyday business of municipal government. Can you help with this?
Michael Pauls ( talk) 00:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Whomyl. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Whomyl. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)