User talk:Christofurio/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pragmatism

Thanks for adding the stuff on Niebuhr. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 21:24, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Christofurio 01:26, Jun 24, 2004 (UTC)

Cutting other people's text

Hey Christofurio,

Could you abstain from chopping up other people's text in the future? It makes the original statement harder to read/follow. If you feel the need to argue with someone's points you can always quote the relevent portion before you begin your response.

Thanks millerc 19:35, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Socialism

Is there any reason why (at Talk:Socialism you put your August 31 response to Sam Spade in front of my August 24 response that says more or less the same? Would you have any problem if I moved it to be below my response? -- Jmabel 16:45, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

My response was NOT to Sam Spade. It was solely to Capone. Your paragraph replies to both of them. I wanted to put my remark close to Capone's because of the particularity of it. But, if you prefer, move it around, I ask only that you type the phrase "To Capone:" in front of it to avoid confusion. --Christofurio 19:28, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

capitalism

Thanks for your comments. I don't fully understand the analogy with Freud -- Freud made general claims but Marx explicitly made historical claims and specifically claimed that capitalism emerged at a certain point in human history. Historians -- not necessarily Marxists -- have also argued over the dating of the emergence of capitalism, but they usually put it within a few centuries of Marx (this really angers many Marxists, thought to others it may seem trivial). In any case, I am not sure why you are concerned with SUsan's comments. Susan in fact is Lir, and he made those comments a very long time ago; they were discussed and he dropped the topic. Why bring up something that was resolved a year or two ago? Slrubenstein

Freedom of worship

What's going to be the difference between this article and Freedom of religion? --jpgordon 22:14, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Opposition to Castro

Thanks for your vote on Opposition to Castro! Regards SilentVoice 21:56, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Archived discussion?

Hello sir, I was wandering whether you would find it acceptable if I was to archive our discussion pertaining to your Hegelian influences addition ? (of course, we can still continue the discussion there). I was under the assumption that any outstanding issues regarding your addition were provisionally resolved. Was I too hasty to archive it without consulting you? If so, please accept my apologies. Are there still, at this point, any further items with respect to the aforementioned addition that you wish to bring up? Thanks for taking the time to read this. El_C

Re: Chalabi

In late spring I did put in a comment about Hoagland's support of Chalabi, but maybe a more extensive section with citations would be useful and possible explanations of how this guy managed to get all this support. I'll think about it.CSTAR 01:22, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Lawrin Armstrong

Hey...this may be a strange question, but what prompted you to write about Lawrin Armstrong? (It's just weird having an article about someone I know...) Adam Bishop 06:17, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I hope you don't mind but I think I'm going to put that on VfD and see what happens...Adam Bishop 19:34, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Copyright vio

Hi. I wasn't sure if you were worried that the Phil of Bus article was copied from something else or if the other site you referenced copied it. User: Ockham and I authored nearly all of it, save a couple of sentences, so it's definitely Wikipedia property. Best.. icut4u --hi Christo

in answer to your question Barings : SIMEX is definitely correct Frank A 07:36, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Pulitzer Prize

Sorry - I'd meant to reply, but had somehow forgotten. That's just the way we set this up originally - but if you want to change it, by all means do so - just make sure to add the previous winners under the existing award. Ambi 23:26, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Other ideologies using socialism in their name

Not bad, it didn't make me want to delete it :P--Che y Marijuana 16:11, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Democracy

I guess I just don't understand why you insist on denying the history of this article. It became about "modern democracy" ages ago. Why didn't you object at that earlier time? "Socrates" belongs in Athenian democracy--isn't this obvious? — Stevie is the man! Talk | Contrib 18:49, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The specific section of the article at issue concerns a specific issue - the degree to which majority rule opens minorities and dissenters to oppression. Oscar Wilde and Socrates are both examples on point. Socrates is the more poignant example precisely because he was killed by the city-state that invented the word. To shuttle that fact off to a separate article is to make the POV judgment that it isn't relevant anymore. Damned if I know why not. How about if we say something like "ancient history may provide other examples" and then create a link to Athenian democracy? --Christofurio 00:56, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

philosophy of biology

I'm happy to see that you share my interest in this subject. I've just created an article of this name, turning those red links blue. Its a crude start, and I welcome help in development of it, if you'd like to try your hand! --Christofurio 16:33, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
And thanks for backing up the points I've been trying to make in the VFD debate over the philosophy of chemistry --Christofurio 00:29, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Christofurio, I wanted to thank you for starting an article on philosophy of biology; I've always thought it's a fascinating area. I'll enjoy making some contributions to the article. And, I'm glad I saw on your user page that philosophy of chemistry is up for VFD. I agree that it would be an unfortunate mistake to delete it.--Nectarflowed 01:22, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Philosophy of chemistry

You did a great job with that article. Congratulations on being the main factor for it surviving VfD. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 19:40, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reference formatting

Hey! You can check out this link for the formatting guidelines on references [1]. However, I'm not sure wether they mention order. I'd say go for the order which seems more relevant to you: just be consistent. I'm not really an authority on this however, so I suppose you left the message on my talk page because I opposed the nomination of yield curve a while ago. I hope I didn't sound too harsh back then. Know that I'll support the article as it is if you resubmit it. Have a nice day! Phils 17:01, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thermal and statistical physics

Hello, Christofurio...I took a look at the Philosophy of thermal and statistical physics, as you requested. Well, these are subjects that certainly have profound philosophical implications; but off the top, I'm inclined to think it would be more appropriate to refer to such matters as part of a philosophy of physics or philosophy of science article, or that the specific philosophical implications should be mentioned in the physics articles that deal specifically with thermodynamics, the Arrow of time, etc. I do not view this as being as distinct from physics, for example, as I do the philosophy of chemistry article that you so ably helped to give life. In any case, if you choose to write something, I should be glad to reveiew it and I certainly would not interefere with having such an article. Best icut4u

Brahms and capitalism

I love your Brahms story! Is this just one of the many things you know, or can you give me a specific source/reference? (I'd just like to read more) Slrubenstein | Talk 20:43, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Re: Judith B. Colton VfD

Your comment about the use of 'cruelty' within Wikipedia is fair. I was definitely restricting myself to the 'it is generally known that no students like her' interpretation. I guess this issue would really fall under concern that there is a biased point of view within an article. If it really could be proven, or at least generally agreed, that no students liked her, I think I would have no problems with such a statement being included. Anyway, this is a bit of an odd thing for me to get hung up on so let me not trouble you with it more. --Fuzzball! 23:38, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

tense

Right. I'm aware of that. I was just sloppy in trying to be quick. I'll try to describe such a change in the correct way next time. Thanks for that. Anyway, it looks like SlimVirgin prefers to say that capitalism valorizes a free market. It would seem to me that valorization would have to come from a conscious action, not an economic system. RJII

Neural Networks vs. Artificial Neural Networks

hey Christofurio! We never had contact, sorry for intruding. There is need for people who are interested in philosophy of biology (looks very promising by the way) at Talk:Neural_network. I guess some people there never heard there was something like neural networks in the human brain. They think, there are only neural network models=artificial neural network and they don't know about the research and the philosophical discussions. I could need some support. Ben (talk) 11:31, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for the invite. I have read popularizing treatments of neurology such as The Emperor's New Mind by Roger Penrose, but I really can't say I'm familiar enough with arguments in the field to provide you with the sort of support you want. Sorry. --Christofurio 13:54, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
It's the name, that is incorrect and steals it from the people who might write about information processing in the brain. In its current form the article is about modelling the brain and not the brain, so the name is just misleading, used by some people who try to get attention by claiming "we build the brain" and others, who repeat it. It would be important to have an article about actual neural networks, i.e. the brain, but if there is no support for renaming, there might be no article (worst case), or one by a very unusual name (best case). All I am asking you is to have a look and it doesn't take long, as you seem familiar with and interested in the topic. BTW, next time, post on my talk page, not the user page, thanks, Ben (talk) 01:53, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

Holistic science

Invite you to have a look at the Holistic science article that has seen increased activity in recent weeks. --Smithfarm 19:54, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Henri Bergson

Hello. Just in case no one's pointed it out to you yet, you put in a lot of incorrect capitals in section headings in Henri Bergson. I've fixed them. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Michael Hardy 23:09, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

NYT Scandal Brewing

Hello. Did you have any information on the NYT ghost-writing investigation? Might make Jayson Blair Number 2 in recent New York Times' scandals. Rumors of investigation at New York Times regarding Carl Hulse of the DC bureau ghost-writing political columns for Maureen Dowd. Haven't seen documentation yet.

[2]

Retrieved from [3]


New to Wiki

I'm just trying to find my way around and keep bumping in to your screen name - last encountered on truth ! Would you have time to look at Wikipedia:Reference Desk (if you don't normally do so) because I have a couple of questions there - but now that I have come here, I think I may have found an answer. Thanks! Jeffrey Newman 06:38, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WSJ

well -- sure; that's just my opinion, I didn't try to insert it into an article or anything; I'm not even a regular reader, it's just that I've read things ni WSJ I could hardly believe people would say with a straight face, even in an opinion piece. But never mind, that's hardly my business.... dab (ᛏ) 17:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Kantianism

I responded to your comments on Talk:Kantianism. I hope it cleared some things up. --malathion talk 23:09, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Hayek and Socialism

Just to let you know I'm happy with your last edit to the article. Cadr 10:16, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Basel II

Thanks for fixing the vandalism --mkamat 11:42, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Troll Banquet

Yes, I did rather go against my own better judgement, as well as my advice to you. I've refrained from such comment through insults and accusations for a few months now, and just decided it was time to reply directly. Something I might well eventually regret, but there is a certain pleasure to be had in harsh words. Banno 10:44, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

By the way, your own question hits the mark beautifully. Banno 10:48, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Mandelbrot

I have visited this page, but I asked the professor permission to use the pictures and he has never replied. nihil 16:19, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

More About that bridge

Sorry for the delay - but I was puzzled. Isn't the engineer simply wrong, in that he has based his belief on information that is now not true - that the bolts were inserted correctly? Banno 09:29, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

"The engineer isn't wrong in the sense of believing something false" - then he knows the bridge is safe to work across; but if he believes it safe to drive a bus over, he is simply wrong, since his belief is not true. Banno 20:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Hegel on history

Hi, Christofurio, I hope you are doing well. Say, do you recall the circumstances under which Hegel stated that "What we learn from history is that we don't learn from history." ? It seems my memory has gone to pot. Thanks in advance. Best, El_C 22:51, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt and detailed response. Its corrections proved very useful; I'm glad I asked! El_C 22:52, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Fischer Black

You should add Fischer Black stuff at your userpage to his page! __earth 14:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Nelson Mandela

Hi Christofurio, while removing vandalism, I missed the bit on the statue that was chopped off. Thanks a ton for spotting it out. --Gurubrahma 14:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

economic fascism

Hey Christo, You may be interested in vote for deletion on the economic fascism article that I authored. (I'm bringing the vote to your attention message because the guy who put it up for deletion went around putting notices on people's talk pages misrepresenting the contents of the article, so maybe some semblance of fairness can be achieved). RJII 16:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC) Hey, thanks for the RFC back up. Let me know if you ever need anything. RJII 18:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Reply

Hey, sorry it took so long, I've been away. I've replied to [Talk:Capitalism#Loss_Is_Not_Punishment]. Infinity0 talk 13:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Economic fascism - spanish model

Please source that new section u just made Christo -- max rspct leave a message 15:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

done.

Hegel

In regards to your change at Hegel, what I really wanted to describe (but lacked the ability to articluate well) there was positive and negative influence. Hence "Marx". — goethean ॐ 16:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

RJII/Firebug arbitration

Greetings! I've reverted your edits to the proposed decision on this case, as only arbitrators may vote on the final decision. You may place comments on the workshop page at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/RJII_v._Firebug/Workshop if you would like to do so. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair use image

Hello! I noticed that you had Image:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad drawings.jpg shown on your user talk page. The image is uploaded under a fair use provision, and Wikipedia policy states that fair use images should not be displayed on any pages outside the main (article) namespace, including user pages. Would you mind removing the image or simply linking to it? (Add a ":" in from of the image, like this: [[:Image:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad drawings.jpg]]) Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The sacrifices I make. Grumble grumble grumble. --Christofurio 00:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for removing it! Flcelloguy (A note?) 02:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

IOU

Could you maybe elaborate at hedge fund? Avriette 16:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Criticisms of capitalism

Hey, I'm posting you this notice because I remember you recently editing the Capitalism article. I moved the "criticisms" section and other criticisms embedded in other sections and their responses to Criticisms of capitalism. Atm the ordering of the sections isn't very logical, since all I did was moved separate sections. Please help, and/or comment at Talk:Capitalism#When_to_split_off_criticisms. Thanks! Infinity0 talk 22:25, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


Naked Short Selling

Good add to the naked short selling page. I welcome your participation and hope that you stick around. I did a couple of minor edits and before I knew it I was dragged into one of the most moronic editing wars I have ever seen! It's got a little of everything, from vandalism to malicious edits to a POV fork. The page has been plagued by meatpuppets and keeps on getting slanted into a kind of conspiracy theory anti-shorting polemic. My stamina is already gone! Waaaaaaw! --Tomstoner 19:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


Naked Shorting Content Dispute (Redux)

Another, independent set of eyes on the naked short sellingpage would be appreciated. Thanks. Note talk page discussion -- my assumption of good faith being worn to the bone here. --Tomstoner 16:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Neoconservatism

I like what you've added, but isn't it a better place for it higher, under Origins? We currently have a reference to Harrington as the probabaly first user, and explain his use. MacDonald should go there, as the true originator. His definition is also pleasingly close to Harrington's, so it would allow us to also drop the reference to Harrington, thus shortening the article. --Duncan 17:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Christofurio/Archive_1&oldid=1141244663"