User talk:Ethan a dawe
| Welcome!
Here are a few good links for newcomers:
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:Where to ask a question, or ask the people around you for help -- good Wikipedians don't bite the newcomers. Keep an open mind and listen for advice, but don't hesitate to be bold when editing! If you'd like to respond to this message, or ask any questions, feel free to leave a message at my talk page! Once you've become a more experienced Wikipedian, you may wish to take a moment to visit these pages:
Best of luck to you, and happy editing! |
Rand Anon IP RfC
[edit]Looking at the dispute resolution protocol, I've made an RfC regarding one of the anon IPs who's trolling this article. Since you've been involved in a dispute with this person please certify it and post your observations here [1]. Idag (talk) 06:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- Ethan, since you had a huge dispute with this anon, would you mind certifying the RfC instead of simply endorsing it? Idag (talk) 18:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you much, hopefully this'll resolve our issues w/ the anon. I took a page from your book and tried ignoring him, but him edit warring on my talk page was the last straw. Idag (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Check User
[edit]Would you mind filling it out? I have an article deadline coming up next week, so I won't have much free time until that's done with. Idag (talk) 19:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
She has already admitted she knows him, which basically makes her a meatpuppet. TallNapoleon (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- Filled out a checkuser for Lillith and we'll see what comes back. Either way, "she" seems more interested in an argument than anything else, so as long as we ignore and revert Edward and his clones, it really doesn't matter whether he can get around his block. Idag (talk) 07:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- RFC'ed her as well. TallNapoleon (talk) 08:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Now that the trolls have abated...
[edit].jpg)
|
WikiProject Objectivism Salutations, Ethan a dawe. I've noticed your interest in articles relating to Objectivism and would like to invite you to join the freshly resuscitated WikiProject Objectivism, a group of Wikipedians devoted to improving articles related to the philosophy of Ayn Rand. If you're interested, consider adding yourself to the list of participants and joining the discussion on the talkpage. Yours in enlightened self-interest, Skomorokh 00:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC) |
Operation COOKIE MONSTER
[edit]
Thanks
[edit]Believe me, the pleasure was all mine. :) TallNapoleon (talk) 03:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7
[edit]Hi there! :)
As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 19:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Order of Hermes (Ars Magica)
[edit]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Order of Hermes (Ars Magica), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of Hermes (Ars Magica). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? 90.209.153.74 (talk) 11:33, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Thanks, Ethan, I'll take a look. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 23:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
A lot of philosophers are hoping to be ignored as much
[edit]They can't stop ignoring her! ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- I suggest you remove your lengthy statement. I know you mean well, but I don't think it's helpful. Wikipedia, like the world, is imperfect. At least we had a good laugh. ;) ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Please work with the Consensus
[edit]Based on the RFc on the Ayn Rand page, there is no consensus to support the edits and deletions made by one faction following the Dec 31 freeze. The vote as to whether there was a consensus for the changes was 9 to 3 against, 7 to 5 if one counts only experienced editors, and adds votes for two editors who commented but did not make an explicit vote. In either case, a minority, no matter how vocal (the talk page has never been so large, and so empty) cannot claim to have established a new consensus.
Hence, we shall revert to the actual consensus version of Dec 31, and I respectfully request that all editors accept and defend this long standing consensus version as the starting point for new edits. Reversions to the controversial shortened article should not be supported against the vote of the RFC. I request that those who wish to modify the article state the changes they want on the talk page, and request a vote for the changes they wish to make. I request that editors not simply assert that there is a new consensus for deletions as has been done, since the RFC clearly shows that this is not the case.
If you have suggestions for improving the article (I support trimming down all sections which have their own separate wikipedia article, such as Objectivist movement) please discuss them, conscisely now, but let us not revert to an edit war. Kjaer (talk) 01:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
RfM
[edit]A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ayn Rand, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, SlimVirgin talk|contribs 02:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Request for mediation not accepted
[edit]
|
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ayn Rand.
00:26, 13 January 2009 (UTC) |
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
Request for Arbitration
[edit]A request for arbitration has been filed with the Arbitration Committee that lists you as a party. The Arbitration Committee requires that all parties listed in an arbitration must be notified of the aribtration. You can review the request at [[2]]. If you are unfamiliar with arbitration on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Arbitration. Idag (talk) 01:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
New Arbitration Request
[edit]A request for arbitration has been filed with the Arbitration Committee that lists you as a party. The Arbitration Committee requires that all parties listed in an arbitration must be notified of the aribtration. You can review the request at [3]. If you are unfamiliar with arbitration on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Arbitration. Idag (talk) 22:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ayn Rand/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ayn Rand/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 00:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Comment that TallNapoleon deleted from his talk page
[edit]I left this on TallNapoleon's talk page related to the "debate" regarding his Anti-Rand paper seen on either TallNapoleon's or TheJazzFan's page and he subsequently deleted it with the comment "not interested". Yes, he does seem to be averse to the truth.
- "You pedantically assert that words have meaning and then proceed to dance around to avoid defining them. Jazz completely outed your fallacious methodology.
- Your analogy of "faith" in God & in the sun rising is beyond absurd. One is observation of an event involving observable bodies with measureable properties and interacting in a known, observable fashion - even if the mechanism isn't completely understood there's nothing to suggest they'll interact in a different manner during a given period. You most certainly can prove the validity of the assertion that "the sun will rise" (i.e. the Earth will rotate) - you can see it happen. The sun never *stops* rising.
- So-called "faith" in God is an amorphous urge that doesn't even rise to the level of a valid assertion given that it's related to some equally amorphous pseudo-entity you've failed to define, thereby rendering impossible anything that can be called a "belief" that's worthy of serious consideration. You're trying to avoid that evidence requires a criteria against which to evaluate it.
- Reason an evil idol? You're just another in a long line of folks trying to use reason to disprove the validity of reason, and as is always the case, utterly failing."TheDarkOneLives (talk) 09:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
The above-linked Arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published.
- TheJazzFan (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.
- Stevewunder (talk · contribs) and Kjaer (talk · contribs) are banned from editing Ayn Rand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and related articles (broadly construed), including talk pages, for one year.
- SteveWolfer (talk · contribs) is banned from editing Ayn Rand and related articles (broadly construed), including talk pages, for six months. TallNapoleon (talk · contribs) is banned from editing Ayn Rand and related articles (broadly construed) for six months, but is free to constructively contribute to talk page discussions.
- Snowded (talk · contribs) and Idag (talk · contribs) are banned from editing Ayn Rand and related articles (broadly construed) for three months, but are free to constructively contribute to talk page discussions.
- Brushcherry (talk · contribs) is reminded that article talk pages are for content discussion and encouraged to broaden his content contributions.
In the event that any user mentioned by name in this decision engages in further disruptive editing on Ayn Rand or any related article or page (one year from the date of this decision or one year from the expiration of any topic ban applied to the user in this decision, whichever is later), the user may be banned from that page or from the entire topic of Ayn Rand for an appropriate length of time by any uninvolved administrator or have any other remedy reasonably tailored to the circumstances imposed, such as a revert limitation. Similarly, an uninvolved administrator may impose a topic ban, revert limitation, or other appropriate sanction against any other editor who edits Ayn Rand or related articles or pages disruptively, provided that a warning has first been given with a link to this decision.
Both experienced and new editors on articles related to Ayn Rand are cautioned that this topic has previously been the subject of disruptive editing by both admirers and critics of Rand's writings and philosophy. Editors are reminded that when working on highly contentious topics like this one, it is all the more important that all editors adhere to fundamental Wikipedia policies. They are encouraged to make use of the dispute resolution process, including mediation assistance from Mediation Cabal or the Mediation Committee, in connection with any ongoing disputes or when serious disputes arise that cannot be resolved through the ordinary editing process.
For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 03:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Atlas Shrugged Article
[edit]Hello! As a member of Wiki Project Objectivism would you please see my post on the excessive coverage of fictional technology, etc. in Atlas Shrugged and my proposal to replace it with more coverage of the meaning of the events in that novel. Thanks. —Blanchette (talk) 03:27, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I am clearing the participant list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Objectivism due to inactivity. Please add yourself again if you want to participate. --Karbinski (talk) 22:08, 23 April 2009 (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) 16:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)