Current time: Monday, November 25, 2024, 03:21 (UTC)

Leave a message

User talk:Sam Spade/ - archive

Quotes

(archived @ User:Sam Spade/Quotes)

"Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others."
- Ambrose Bierce

Art

User:Sam Spade/Art and artists

Picture of the day

Thecacera pennigera, also known as the winged thecacera, is a species of sea slug in the family Polyceridae. It has a cosmopolitan distribution, being found in temperate waters on either side of the North Atlantic Ocean, in the Mediterranean Sea, around South and West Africa, Brazil, Japan, Korea, Pakistan and more recently in Australia and New Zealand. There is a significant difference in colouring between Atlantic populations and Pacific specimens, however. Thecacera pennigera has a typical adult length between 15 millimetres (0.6 in) and 30 millimetres (1.2 in), featuring a short, wide head with two lateral flaps and two sheathed olfactory organs called rhinophores. The body is wedge shaped, being wide at the front and ending in a slender foot with a lateral keel on either side. The general colour of the body is translucent white and the upper side is covered with orange splotches and small black spots. Like other sea slugs, T. pennigera is a hermaphrodite with internal fertilisation and a mating mechanism whereby pairs of animals exchange packets of sperm. This T. pennigera was photographed in the Mar Piccolo of Taranto, Italy.Photograph credit: Roberto Strafella

Archive – More featured pictures...

To include this picture of the day on a page, add the text {{pic of the day}}.

races

I'm a bit confused as to where you stand. Are you in favor of the Coon photo? If so, which? You placed the one with six panels in the artcile but you have mentioned on the talk page that you think the five panel one is the original. David D. (Talk) 19:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think your mistaken, see [1]. Cheers, Sam Spade 21:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops my mistake. David D. (Talk) 21:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

human

Hey Sam, please comment on or edit Tom's and my proposal for Human. I'm afraid that in attempting to seperate the socio-cultural text from the religious text, I've messed it up quite a bit. I've been trying to come up with three paragraphs of roughly equal size. — goethean ॐ 20:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: my status. Oops, sure. Also, Goethean did a great job of writing a spiritual definition of humans, I think. Tom Haws 22:51, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA Coordinator Election

Dear AMA Member,

You are entitled to vote in the AMA Coordinator election, set to begin at midnight on 3 February 2006. Please see the pages on the election and its candidates and the procedure and policy and cast a vote by e-mail!

Wally 11:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why Adam Smith is obnoxious

Sam, I notice you asking Cognition about Adam Smith. This passage from the Theory of Moral Sentiments tells the whole story:

The administration of the great system of the universe ... the care of the universal happiness of all rational and sensible beings, is the business of God and not of man. To man is allotted a much humbler department, but one much more suitable to the weakness of his powers, and to the narrowness of his comprehension: the care of his own happiness, of that of his family, his friends, his country.... But though we are ... endowed with a very strong desire of those ends, it has been intrusted to the slow and uncertain determinations of our reason to find out the proper means of bringing them about. Nature has directed us to the greater part of these by original and immediate instincts. Hunger, thirst, the passion which unites the two sexes, and the dread of pain, prompt us to apply those means for their own sakes, and without any consideration of their tendency to those beneficent ends which the great Director of nature intended to produce by them.

I take this to mean that man should simply allow his bestial side to rule him, and make no effort to grasp the chain of moral consequences of his actions or inactions. I dislike fundamentalists because I think that they share this view, what Gottfried Leibniz called "Lazy Reason." --HK 01:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Loving our neighbors (or striving to) is not bestial. It is clear to me that Smith is standing with God in opposition to the awkward and inconsiderate failures of mankind.

"To man is allotted a much humbler department, but one much more suitable to the weakness of his powers, and to the narrowness of his comprehension: the care of his own happiness, of that of his family, his friends, his country.... But though we are ... endowed with a very strong desire of those ends, it has been intrusted to the slow and uncertain determinations of our reason to find out the proper means of bringing them about."

I am currently enjoying your piano sonata btw, thanks,

Sam Spade 01:28, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well... however imperfectly, it is my intention to make "the care of the universal happiness of all rational and sensible beings" my business; and what deeds I do in my personal life, I endeavor to do with due "consideration of their tendency to those beneficent ends which the great Director of nature intended to produce by them." Regards, HK 07:34, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That those are my goals as well I should hope is a given. I can only ask that others forgive my "slow and uncertain determinations" ;) Sam Spade 23:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Albanians

Hello mate!

Would you please tell me how much you know about the Albanians, Albania and Kosova? Did you make the changes to the University of Prishtina regarding how you think the article should be or you were just lobbying for the Serbs?--Pjetër Bogdani jr. 02:38, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The former of course, I have no ethnic "favortism", certainly not in this particular, I don't believe I've ever met either a serb or an albanian. I made what I saw as a NPOV, inclusionist edit. I kept both images, since their is no NPOV reason for deleting either one. Universities changes logo's and names, but we arn't here to erase the past, but rather to record it. Or should I be speaking only for myself?

As a side note, what do you know about Leka Anwar Zog Reza Baudouin Msiziwe and his fathers recent arrest for arms stockpiling. I'd like to see both of their articles updated, if you'd like to helk. Cheers, Sam Spade 12:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad

Please remove this picture : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Miraj2.jpg#file

because Islam not allow a picture of Muhammad. (anon)

Thank You. (anon)

[2] [3] both of these (from miraj, and even the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons which have caused so much controversy are allowed on the wiki. There isn't much I could do about that even if I wanted to, I am not an admin. You could discuss this on the talk pages of the images in question, or at Wikipedia:Images for deletion, but I expect it would be fruitless. My advice is that you accept that non-muslims often violate islamic laws, but that you as a muslim(assuming you are) choose not to. Sam Spade 07:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And since like all large religions there are many denominations, interpretations, etc in Islam. There are pictures of Muhammad from the Islamic world; these often come from the shi'a/shi'ite & the region once known as Persia.

Race

I just wanted you to know that while I came on a bit strong in response to your comment on talk human, I intended a rather whimsical tone, and certainly didn't mean any offense. Also, while we may not have any shared POV's (mine are listed here) we do like some of the same music (mozart, beethoven, dylan, the beatles...) Cheers, Sam Spade 14:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken...I can see why you're so frustrated, although I'm glad to see it was just sarcasm (otherwise I might've responded "Huh?") :) . Also, I think your new (old) suggestion is perfect bewcause that really is where long discussions of war, spirituality, philosphy, economic go. (BTW, we do agree on economics for the most part). My scores on the political poll were -5.63 -6.72. Ah well, at least our tastes in music show similarities. User:Jim62sch (sig left by Sam Spade 16:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I support a free market and trade, entreprenuership and all that good stuff. Efficiency is like a commandment from God in my eyes ;) That said, I just can't accept allowing kids to starve and people being neglected when we could help them thrive. Are you familiar w Eudaimonia? Eudaimonic Meritocracy is the simplest way to explain my ideal state. Cheers, Sam Spade 16:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If something is Greek (or Latin), I usually know it. :) I don't know if a meritocracy, while a good ideal, is realizable in any setting: nepotism and political favoritism are too prevalent in many businesses and in the appointee levels of government.

I most certainly agre with you about the blind eye turned by many on the starving people of the world. We have the resources to feed them, and we should make sure it happens. However, in many cases the hold of religions that ban contraception needs to be loosened -- the earth has finite resources, and more will not fall to earth like manna from the gods. Jim62sch 22:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I favor non-racial (meritocratic) eugenics, as well as what I know so far about Euthenics. Neither contradict my spiritual values, at least not how I interpret them. I do not agree with contraception alone can be an answer, indeed I think that has thus far proven to have a dysgenic effect, with more intelligent, responsible, wealthier persons making use of contraceptives, and the poor, irresponsible and ignorant breeding furiously, while making use of social welfare to achieve ever lower rates of mortality despite their excesses. God helps those who help themselves... Sam Spade 22:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dysgenics

Thanks. I came across the article when checking links for a rewrite of Euthenics, at which you might like to look. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating, thank you. It reminds me of eudaimonia, which I was discussing in the thread just above. Cheers, Sam Spade 19:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a decline in IQ in the West, it's because we've become fat, sated and lazy, both physically and intellectually. Some think the answer is to improve the schools, lengthen the school year etc., but in reality the culture needs to be changed. However, since the popular culture is very good for business, it will not be changed in any meanigful way in this regard. Yes, the social engineering of merely stating the word "values" (as if that meant anything) will continue, but the values of which the social engineers speak are actually stultifying, not intellectually stimulating.

Anyway, we're getting a bit off-topic here, so we should really get back to making this article something worthwhile. Jim62sch 22:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to figure out why euthenics is seen to contridict eugenics. Perhaps you can help? Sam Spade 22:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The kno-how

Hi Sam-man, well we'll likely never meet, and Im an eejit to no, how u kn'w.

I was only thinking od=f you in relation to all this , in terms of the following. Without giving any hostages to fortune, lets say I , in my own way study digital transference. They get a fit reading this , but anyway, digital transfer it is taht I study , or use. WP ? No , I m not talking WP , im talking nothing. Anyway, what I was thinking , that I can say to you out there is simply this, relating to this soft ware in a round about way. It is that there is an empowerm,ent of deision making in all this greater non-wiki software, that colours our human reaction to it. It is the immediacy of the choice. Every time we hit save , we have that choice to hit and thereby save. In real technical media this choice is only by strenuous activity allowable of a reversal. Therefore the choice of the moment is generally the one, single decision. In terms of programs this appears to be self-evident , but that is only to speak of the superficial consequence.

The eternal nature of this digital choice, made by us through our action, also colours the interaction ,in such example as we have here, or the abandonment of it by the unwilling to make that choice, is in fact only of similar finality to the action of pulling the trigger upon the battlefield. The digital speed of thought required , and I do not speak in this regard of the politics or sourceing(!) in WP, this speed is what, by human interaction, informs or grows the very software.

The relatively in-accessible software here, because it is constrained solely to the the same Alphabet, or similar such letter combinations, does in nio way accelerate through its additions of wiki software command. Indeed the results are imediate , or relatively so, scraped, bordering on all sorts of issue which can be painted as moral, however, the more interesting field is that of the very intersection between immediacy and immortality.

We have all realised that the appearance of a miracle, in the terms in which it was previously recognised and reported, or believed, this wer have expected-such was the strength of last reports- we are led to expect anew a greater, deeper, more universal miracle. yes they discussed my report of miracles before, and doubtless will again. I did not intend eb=even to mention this word, save that I share my thoughts with you in the complete presumption of good faith, accorded by you ever since you cheery welcome to me upon my WP birth.

At this my enforced death-Yes Jimbo-death, at this death moment I choose to return to sam here, as my Mother. He it is who told me that it ws right, right to be born , and right to be bold. Sam it was who gave me the faith to open my hand and to receive the power of this software. He came with a heart to me as a living mind, appealing to my better nature, and suggested that I could BE.

Sam is not to blame for my execution- that is either simply me myself, or a question. Sam does not need to make a comment, as Sam is my birth and has seen me both live and now die. I die feeling very sorry that he Sam still bears the living.EffK 19:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think your a great guy and would be glad to meet you in person. Feel free to email me anytime. Sam Spade 22:53, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi mysticism page

"Sam Spade",

Several users are trying to help this page be worthy of an encylopedia. Undocumented information does not belong on the site. See comments on the Nazi mysticism talk page. The next step is to take this into conflict resolution. Hgilbert 19:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The information is documented. After I finish midterms I'll look into citing it line by line. Meanwhile take a deep breath. Are you a sockpuppet? From your editing pattern you appear to be a role account, but if not, please take some time to get to know our policies before trying to threaten others. Its no way to make a first impression. Sam Spade 22:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Spade,

I would appreciate your dropping the insulting tone you have taken up. Personal comments are inappropriate in discussing Wikipedia editing.

Hgilbert 19:09, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I feel a need to repeat the question. Are you a sockpuppet? Your edits seem suggestive of such. If you are not (and I am prepared to take your word on it), I suggest you review some of wikipedia's basic policies. Your off to a rocky start removing cited information and edit waring. Sam Spade 19:25, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Historical revisionism (political)

Just FYI: I saw your edits at the top of the talk page here. I've put it up for peer review as I think the material in this article is highly questionable. On the talk page you can see some of my comments, as I suspect the changes I noted there will be reverted from the article in short order. I'm just letting you know in case you are interested in helping out. Don't feel like you have to. Thanks for your time. --DanielCD 21:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to help, but I have midterms and will be moving on march 1st... so it'll be slow! Sam Spade 19:27, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-racist mathematics

Sam - I don't have any problem with the references you added to anti-racist mathematics - you will note that I did not remove them, I only moved them to the appropriate section. Criticisms belong in the Criticisms section of the article, and need to be stated in a NPOV way. Gandalf61 12:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Genrebox

What the heck? I don't hav e the time to follow you about reverting you, but... this sucks! Sam Spade 15:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Music genres is pretty clear -- only the top-level genre page (e.g. heavy metal music) gets the infobox. That's exactly how every other infobox on the wiki works AFAIK. Tuf-Kat 15:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience Wikipedia:WikiProject Music genres is aplace where one or 2 arrogant people make decisons for the rest of us, suggesting that being members of a wiki-project grants them sort of final say (I am unaware of wiki-projects having any actual official authority). Maybe I'm just jaded, see my experience here. Either way I completely disagree with what your doing. I see no possible benifit, but plenty of inconvenience and instruction creep. So... outside of some obscure guideline on a wikiproject w 3 members... why are you doing this?Sam Spade 15:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's an infobox... All infoboxes go on one page -- it's got information about heavy metal music, not grindcore or National Socialist black metal. Most of the info and links in the box are tangential at best in an article like Bay Area thrash metal. If someone wanted to come up with a standardized way of linking subgenres (or even an infobox designed for subgenres), I'd be fine with that, but it's just far too bulky and irrelevant to throw template:heavy metal into dozens of articles. Tuf-Kat 16:02, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We probably agree more than we disagree, esp. about cruft like "Bay Area thrash metal". Where we don't agree is how templates help or hinder obscure articles. I personally put them EVERYWHERE they could possibly of value, because they help me(and others) ALOT. Lets have a look @

Both have cruft. Both help readers find what they are looking for. Neither is irrelevant. If they are bulky, lets trim the template, not trim the template from the articles it links to! Sam Spade 16:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

user:Urthogie proposed replacing {{heavymetal}} on other pages than Heavy metal music with a footer like {{Hiphop}}. How would that sit with you? Circeus 22:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Sam Spade 22:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At any rates, Once I'm done with that, I'll nominate these single instance for deletion. Circeus 23:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't understand you. What will you nominate for deletion? Sam Spade 23:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The specific genrebox templates. Since genreboxes are not intended to appear on more than a single page anyway, there is no necessity to fork specific genreboxes to separate templates. The only plausible reason would be that the templates are too big (dixit the country infobox stuff, IIRC), but these are not. {{pop}} is already for deletion and I supported (but I opposed the bad faith deletion of {{popmusic}}). Circeus 23:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I might agree, but... how would this affect the black metal template? Sam Spade 00:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox itself would remain on the page, but as what it is i.e. an infobox instead of the current needless separate template (since said template is not supposed to appear on any page but Black metal). A template is intended to either remove a massive amount of information from a page or be reused on several pages, and neither of these does that. I have started a discussion on the whole thing at the project's talk page.

Human

sam, I'll take a look.

Raj2004 16:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam, I disagree with this statement: Adi Shankara in the East proposed Advaita Vedanta, a popular argument for monism (the metaphysical view that all is of one essential essence, substance or energy).

It should have read: Adi Shankara in the East was a leading proponent of Advaita Vedanta, a popular argument for monism (the metaphysical view that all is of one essential essence, substance or energy). Monism was long described before Sankara in the Vedas. Many believe that Sankara revitalized theistic monism which was in decline and Buddhism was at its height in 700 AD.

Raj2004 17:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! Sam Spade 17:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Humanity

I found your name at wikiproject:hinduism, and was hoping you might join us at talk:human, where things have become rather unbalanced and unrepresentitive of humanity as a whole. Cheers, Sam Spade 16:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Thanks for calling...I saw the argument but couldn't make out where to jump in... Rohitbd 18:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, its a crazy mess and I don't know what should be done. One thiong is clear, we need some representitives of world faiths to help balance out a rather unified group of atheists intent on enforcing their POV as the correct and scientific understanding of humanity... My goal of course is NPOV, and the inclusion of diverse points of view in a balanced article. Sam Spade 18:36, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mysticism

Sam, your comments are understood, but I left this version in talk for a week asking for a response. that was your oportunity for summary rejection. please leave the version as is for some short time - I'll add a contentious issue warning

________________

Sam, I'm concerned about an NPOV issue, but I thought I'd bring it up here before re-editing the Mysticism page. I can see the bit that you reintroduced, and I can see why you think it's important, but it seems to me that the only thing this passage does (aside from the comment on the Hellanistic world, which would probably be better dealt with in the body), is create a misperception through the peculiar structure of the sentence. a first-time reader is going to take from this that mysticism is about "communion with or conscious awareness of God (the divine ultimate reality) through direct, personal experience, intuition or insight" - the others phrases are going to disapper. I could fix this easily, mind you, like this (a bit rough, sorry, and I'm not sure I agree with this statement entirely, but...):

Mysticism involves the pursuit of achieving - through direct personal experience, intuition or insight - (1) a communion with or conscious awareness of God, or (2) an experience of reality beyond ordinary perceptual or intellectual apprehension. it also holds that such experiences are an important source of knowledge.

this would put the communion with God on a more even field with the other statement. stated this way, though, I don't see what this adds to the revised introduction; it essentially duplicates what is in the next paragraph.

look, personally I'm right there with the Christian notion of an immanent God, or the advaitan "Atman is Brahman; Brahman is Atman"; that's my own personal beliefs. but I understand the Nietzschian and Buddhist objections that 'God' and 'soul' and 'Atman' and 'Brahaman' are empty concepts, and I understand the Jungian/NewAge shamanistic idea that G, S, A and B are important psychological or archetypal constructs, and I think it's inappropriate to implicitly foster the idea that mysticism is primarily about communion with God. I would ask you to reconsider your edit with that in mind. Ted 17:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware of some form of mysticism that is godless? If so can you cite it? I am not... Sam Spade 21:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hey Sam - is there a reason you moved the headers out of the mysticism article into talk? I'd put the 'underconstruction' head so people realized that the page was being revised, and the spirituality portal tag ought to go on the main page, not talk.

communication?

Sam, I put some comments in the mysticism talk page, and then you went and undid changes I made without answering or (apparently) reading them. please do be a little more communcative. ;-) Ted 18:19, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

edit problems

Sorry sam, if I knew how to get this page protected from editing while this dispite was resolved, I would do that. I don't know how, though, so I will simpy use reverts to keep the page static until either someone else steps in and protects it, or we reach some communcicative understanding. my apologies. Ted 22:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Wikipedia:Edit war. The page can be Wikipedia:Protected, but not for long. This is a Collaborative editing project, and the behavior I have seen you engaging in is not acceptable. Please observe our Wikipedia:Policies. Sam Spade 22:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok. I really don't want an edit war, and (frankly) I don't think your behavior has been very decent either. I'll ask about getting it protected for a short time, if only so we have a space to work out our differences. this entire dispute is personal, not content oriented (or so it seems to me), and it would be good to have a non-editing space to work out our differences. we could of course do this independently if you were willing to compromise a bit on your position; would that be possible? Ted 23:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You need to restore the edits I and another made. I can agree to the removal of the image and restoration of the headers you made up (for now), but reverting article improvements is entirely unacceptable. Restoring these edits would be an important step towards redeeming yourself. Sam Spade 23:27, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it. unfortunately there have been subsequent edits, so I'm having to go back through the history to recover points. it's time consuming, and I got smacked with a rush-rush project at work. I'll get to it tonight, God willing.

in the meantime, I'd like to talk to you about establishing a rules-structure for our edits. I have no problem with your section additions, but I do take issue when you destroy large sections of work that I did without any discussion. frankly, I'd be happy if you would take the time to discuss issues until we reach consensus on them. that would make this process easier. your general practice (to date) has been to state your position, and then go ahead and make changes regardless of whether I agree or disagree. I don't find that an acceptable form of interaction. there's no hurry on this, and drastic actions are uncalled for, so let's try to reach consensus before taking revisionary action.

incidentally, I find it odd that you'd think I need to redeem myself. I don't see it at all... Ted 17:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Deunov

Hi Sam Spade; I wonder if you might be kind enough to have a look at the Peter Deunov article. It has a number of problems, in my opinion:

in general, it lacks sources from "reliable and reputable sources"
in particular, it makes assertions that bear on notability that are not sourced
does not use Deunov in place of Peter Deunov, The Master Peter Deunov, and Beinsa Douno in accordance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Subsequent uses of names
reads like a hagiography, for the most part.
doesn't include a statement near the beginning that the subject is not regarded by most scholars as a major figure in Esoteric Christianity, i.e., to counterbalance the disproportionate length of the article.

Please see Talk:Peter Deunov, if you have an interest in this. I'd be interested in your opinion of the article. Omraam Mikhaël Aïvanhov, Great White Brotherhood and Paneurhythmy share many of the same issues and editors as Peter Deunov.

Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the sort of subject where "reliable and reputable sources" are pretty much impossible, and we have to take what we can get. Any source at all is better than none. I'm glad to help tho when I have the time, the subject interests me a good deal. On a related note, do you have any idea what is inside the rose in this picture?:

File:The Winged Self.JPG

Sam Spade 18:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am without a clue. The resolution isn't very good. It is up for deletion, BTW. Thanks for your help and comment on Deunov; I thought it might be of interest. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 19:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be a tear poured for each one of us, lost in our own illusions...? Our God who art our Winged Self.

--GalaazV 04:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, good suggestion! I'm glad I left this thread up when I archived! Sam Spade 09:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship and you

Howdy, Mr. Spade,

I note your name on the "list of non-admins with high edit count" is bold-faced, indicating that you would like adminship. I know about you only what is written on your userpage, and what I remember from your ArbCom bid. Your distaste for IAR makes me more than happy to nominate you; I do wonder, though, if you are controversial in some way that I've missed. Your love of the 2nd Amendment and paramilitarism certainly places you to my right politically, notwithstanding the political compass. (I support the 2nd Amendment, but I hardly think it the liberty most at peril today under Mr. Bush.) That is no reason to suggest you are not good adminstrative material, however; so, I am at a loss regarding the fact of your non-promotion.

In any event, if you wish, I would be honored to nominate you. Given your long tenure, I'd appreciate any insight into what portions of your record you would wish to highlight. Although I haven't been here that long, I am at least somewhat known at RFA for my standards, which include a distaste for rogue (ie. IAR-loving) admins. That said, I perfectly understand if you would rather not be nominated by a relative "newbie".

The Maltese Falcon is, without a doubt, the best film ever made. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks. Yes, I am plenty controversial for all sorts of reasons, most of them politically motivated (I NPOV contentious articles, or try to...). It seems like you've read User:Sam Spade/Theoretical Biases already, and despite our differences (I've read your user page) you still want to support me, which is a pretty good endorsement I say. As far as what to highlight, my User:Sam Spade/Contributions and work as an AMA advocate, as well as my increasingly successful bids for a position as arbiter.

If you decide to go ahead w this, be prepared for alot of mess, I don't plan on personally fighting each and every one of the POV warriors who may line up for an opportunity to sling mud, some of which might come your way just for having the gall to support me... Cheers, Sam Spade 18:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xoloz would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Xoloz to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sam Spade 2. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

If I've missed something you want in the nom. (or you object to my editorial comment on our differences :) ), just let me know. Best wishes, Xoloz 22:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you all the good luck that you need to get through this. --- Charles Stewart^(talk) 21:46, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate that. Its not whether I win or lose, its how I play the game. The worst thing about the internet is how some people behave badly in ways they they wouldn't be brave enough to IRL, while so many others condone it... I'm taking a social psychology class at present, and its downright shocking how insightful it is in regards to the wikipedia... Sam Spade 22:49, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new award

I, Quadell, award you this stylized Maltese Falcon for your many fine contributions to Wikipedia. Keep up the great work!

Hey, thanks, that looks great! Any advice on how to do abetter job w the formatting? Is there a page on wiki formatting language, and image placement and such? Cheers, (and thanks again), Sam Spade 18:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nazism and socialism

If you want to go to Fascism and ideology and make a case for recreating the page Nazism and socialism please do so. If you continue to attempt to enforce your tiny minority viewpoint on numerous pages over this issue, I will file an arbitration, since mediation has already failed.--Cberlet 14:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with your assumptions. I'm certainly not expressing a tiny minority viewpoint, I am disagreeing with you about what page a certain peice of information should be placed on. You have refused to discuss, so arbitration (after about an hours disagreement) strikes me as more than a bit hyperbolic... Assumably your request would be thrown out. Sam Spade 14:30, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This dispute has been going on for months. If you are serious about a discussion about proper pages, then go to Fascism and ideology and propose carving out the section on Nazism and socialism instead of creating a needless confrontation.--Cberlet 14:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please step back and find another way to think about things. Yes, we have disagreed in the past, and now we are disagreeing about the placement of text on Nazism in relation to other concepts, but there has been no dispute going on for months. This is a brand new issue, to which I bring no emotional baggage. If you have other issues I suggest you deal with them separately. Sam Spade 14:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The text you inserted was 95% a duplication of the text on Fascism and ideology. You made no effort to raise the issue on Fascism and ideology. You did not challenge the merge discussion on the page Nazism in relation to other concepts. There has been a group of editors working on a project involving several pages for months. Rather than joining us, you simply stamped duplicate text onto a page from which it had already been moved. It has been on Fascism and ideology for many weeks. Editing has moved forward. This is not a new issue. And you can achieve what you want simply by going to Fascism and ideology and joining in the ongoing editing and discussion. --Cberlet 14:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We don't agree, but at least you are discussing the text I restored. Would you care to explain why you changed the page into a redirect? Sam Spade 15:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not an issue of the two of us disagreeing. The issue is that you are not abiding by a collective editing process. That text on Nazism as a form of socialism was MOVED many weeks ago. That MOVE was discussed. Since the text was MOVED, it has been edited, discussed, and re-edited by a number of editors. What you did was CREATE A POV FORK by stamping BACK INTO the page Nazism in relation to other concepts, older text that you prefer and which reflects your idiosyncratic minority viewpoint. In doing so you IGNORED the DISCUSSION where it was clear that the text REMAINING on the page Nazism in relation to other concepts was BEING MERGED into several other pages. All I did was finish that process. There are now new pages on Nazism and religion and Nazism and race (a stub at least but I plan to grow it). There is also now a page called Nazism in relation to other concepts (disambiguation).

I know you have been peddling the idea that Nazism is a form of socialism on several pages for many months. As you are well aware, most editors disagree with you, challenge you claims on discussion pages, and edit your text. If you wish to avoid the appearance that you are simply continuing a long, contentious, and disruptive attempt to once again force your view on the subject back onto the pages of Wikipedia, may I humbly suggest that you go to Fascism and ideology and join in the ONGOING EDITING AND DISCUSSION on the issue of whether or not Nazism is a form of socialism, where 95% of the text you recently plopped onto the now redirected page Nazism in relation to other concepts, has been for MANY WEEKS.

If you wish to show good faith, please consider not reverting the redirect of Nazism in relation to other concepts, and remove the call for the deletion of Nazism in relation to other concepts (disambiguation)]]. This discussion itself should move to the page Fascism and ideology, and so I am taking the liberty of duplicating it on that page, where I will be delightd to continue the discussion.--Cberlet 15:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was told by an admin that using Caps was considered shouting. I was not aware of this. I removed the Caps. Restoring them is one more example of why you are unfit to be an admin.--Cberlet 21:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is definitely considered shouting, and until your remove your accusation of "aggressive bullying" against me, it seems disingenuous to allow you to cover up your hypocrisy in this way. If you apologise and begin behaving decently, that would be a different matter entirely. As is, I cannot reconcile your perpetual threats with your expectations of leniency. Sam Spade 22:08, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA election

Sam, did you see the post I made on the AMA talk page on Valentine's Day? Maybe you and Wally can see if the AMA can finally make a decision about something? Alex756 16:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Brainwashing.jpg

Hi. Image:Brainwashing.jpg, which is currently being rendered in your userspace, is an unfree-copyrighted image. According to Wikipedia's fair use policies, use of such images in userspace is not allowed. Please edit User talk:Sam Spade in such a way that the image is no longer rendered. One can link to an image description page without rendering the image by inserting a colon as the first character in the wikilink. Thanks for understanding. Jkelly 17:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it. Sam Spade 21:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tesla articles

Have you noticed how William M Connoley has been removing sentences from the main Tesla articles attributing them be be worded with POV yet allows this sentence: "His basic arguments against space being curved by gravitational effects demonstrate that he failed to understand Einstein's theories." to remain in Dynamic Theory of Gravity as well as the categorizations of "pseudoscience" to articles that have no confirmation of being such or another? This doesn't make sense. 72.144.147.32

Addition to Ayyavazhi

Hai Sam, I had added this sub-heading Ayyavazhi to the Ayyavazhi article. Please take a look. Do it need any modification or addition? please tell. Thank You. - Vaikunda ^{(<.^.>)} Raja

AMA memberlist

Please blank the AMA memberlist as you see fit. I'd do it, but I sense that Wally would be less offended if you did. Hipocrite - «Talk» 00:25, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cognitive dissonance and Buyer's remorse

I'm asking the following because I see you copied some of the text of Cognitive dissonance to User:Sam Spade/Resources, so I presume the topic interests you.

I have a problem with this claim: "In economics this term [cognitive dissonance—Lambiam] is also called buyer's remorse. This post-purchase behavior is more likely to happen when the purchase is a more expensive one. The consumer may experience some regrets or questioning as to whether the purchase was a good one." Apart from the minor issue that remorse is not a behavior, I fail to see how buyer's remorse fits the definition of cognitive dissonance given.

I also have a problem with an earlier claim: "To experience the feeling of cognitive dissonance or dissonant condition may be equated with gut feel." Where did that come from? Is cognitive dissonance a feeling? I don't think it is a particularly helpful "equation".

Before I remove these sentences, I'd like to hear your opinion. Lambiam 10:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The relationship with buyer’s remorse I can vouch for, altho not the precise wording. I am taking a social psychology class at the moment, and they give buyers remorse as an everyday example of cognitive dissonance. The way they explain it has less to do w the value of the item however. They say that it depends on if it is possible to return. Items which can be returned are less likely to satisfy than those which we cannot return. Similarly, marriages in countries where divorce is more difficult are more likely to be happy, while marriages in places where divorce is common (like California) are more likely to be unhappy. Same principle. The bit about gut feeling seems like something some random guy tossed in. I don’t see it as particularly wrong, but I doubt it could be easily cited. Sam Spade 12:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've removed the gut feel and somewhat rephrased the buyer's remorse. Lambiam 18:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My compliments

Sam, as long as we truly are NPOV, and the views we put in an article are significant and properly expressed, and we reach some kind of consensus, I'm cool with it (even if I disagree with the view ityself). My contention is usually with uncited/unsourced viewpoints that are truly minority viewpoints. Like if one person said he had proof humans were decendants of the planet Intiperon, 5th in the Alpha Cygni star system, I don't think I'd include it. Yes, nuts have feelings, but sometimes one can only go but so far. :) Jim62sch 17:36, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Universism DRV

Hi, Sam, you voted to undelete the Universism article last year. The outcome of that VFD shelved the article until March 2006. However, the issue has come up again just shy of that date, the article is again undergoing a DRV. Since last year, Universism has been featured in many media outlets, including the LA Times and CNN's Anderson Cooper 360. Would you please vote again in favor of undeleting the article? --Mindbender 20:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

I just wanted to commend you on the way you have been handling your RfA. There seem to a lot of people taking cheap shots at you, and while I am sure you have had to handle personal remarks about you in the past, the large amount expressed and intimated in your RfA would have caused a lot of other editors to lash out in defense. Although you will not pass, just keep up your good work around WP, and you can be recognised in ways other than sysophood. See you around, my friend. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 00:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard it said that fighting on ones own RFA is in particularly poor taste, so I tried hard to avoid it. All I hope for on this particular occasion is more support than opposition. I'd like to think that the community has a better community opinion than when I started... Sam Spade 00:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it is frowned upon, and your resisting it is why I was motivated to come and thank you. As to more support than opposition, that may be close. Good luck with that. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 00:40, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam, I think the community definitely has a better opinion of you than it did at your last RfA. Keep in mind that criteria for RfAs have gotten more and more nitpicky as time has passed, so if your support percentage is roughly the same this time as last time, I'd say that means you're held in higher esteem now than you were then. Babajobu 04:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Sam. Your RfA didn't succeed, but it certainly got a lot of interest. Cheers, Cecropia 04:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Damn. I wish I had seen you nominated. I would have voted to support. I have only had positive dealings with you, Sam. Jcam 19:17, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think thats true for most people. The problem for me is in changing the minds of those who have formed a bad opinion of me, for whatever reason. Advice on that, anyone? Sam Spade 21:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Labels?

Maybe you might want to consider loosing the labels completely, yes we use them on an academic term but otherwise there can be a danger and can reify gender and sexuality into something constructed rather than natural. Surely gender and sexuality cannot be talked of as binary, since for example bisexuality and asexuality exist. Also mixed-sex individuals exist in much more larger numbers than seems to be the case (about 1 in 200 people are born of a mixed-gender, most of which physically look one or the other 'male' or 'female').

??? Sam Spade 22:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam

Well we are at it again---it never stops. I ask you to look at this==Wikinfo:Censorship and Article laundering. I think you shall find that interesting. I also point you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#WHEELER. Nothing I do does any good. But I want to point out something else: Talk:Republic#Article is still horrible---it's great comment. All those people with degrees---and can't get anywhere close. They have also put Cretan/Spartan connection on delete mode in five days. Can you ask to make it an external link. Some of it I grant you is original research but because of that incident where they are trying to "article laundering" I have to protect my genesis of articles. Thanks. I wouldn't be troubling you like this but things around here are so super silly.WHEELER 00:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to contact me for any reason as often as you like. Have you copied the article(s) in question to Wikibooks and/or wikisource? Sam Spade 00:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are at Wikinfo. What is wikisource? Does it allow this kind of stuff?WHEELER 00:52, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It should, look into it. wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page Sam Spade 00:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

Don't remove images from pages before they are deleted. That helps no one. Sam Spade 02:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, it helps everyone. It helps anyone watching the page by notifying them that there's a problem with the image. It helps the uploader, because very frequently they decide that they shouldn't have uploaded the image, and want it deleted. It helps the admin who deletes the image, because they don't have to worry about removing it from articles. It helps Wikipedia readers, because there are fewer redlinks from deleted images cluttering articles. And it helps me, because it's a lot easier to remove images before they're deleted. --Carnildo 02:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't help the readers, which is what were here to do. If images deserve deletion, delete them according to the established process. If they do not deserve deletion, let them stay where they are. Your theorem assumes the image will be deleted. Mine assumes it will not. Sam Spade 02:51, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at OrphanBot's logs indicates that the vast majority of images will be deleted. Probably the most revealing section of the log is this, where a minor mistake caused OrphanBot to log a link to every image it came across for a while: 146 out of 153 images have been deleted. (Ignore the bit about "does not have an appropriate template" -- that's just OrphanBot looking for a "no license" template on a "no source" image.) --Carnildo 03:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Systema disambiguation

I'm un-merging the various Systema-related articles because they were merged without discussion. If you wish to discuss these changes, please visit Talk:Systema. -- Sy / ^(talk) 16:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, your recent reversion vandalism and insistance on not following procedure or discussion has been reported. -- Sy / ^(talk) 16:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What? I merged those articles over a month ago (and discussed it at length, btw). Your response is very disturbing. Sam Spade 16:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it was "discussed at length" and others and myself definately still have a problem with the article. Perhaps a vote on whether it should be changed is in order? --Mista-X 00:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about you just do what you think is best? I'm not trying to force my way here, I just did what I thought best. If you guys don't like it, go ahead and change it back. Its the high stress comments like the above that I am concerned about at this point. Sam Spade 10:45, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

question bout AFD

Ok so I have a question here, and I want a second opinion before I submit this as an AfD

The Drowned Baby Timeline appears to me to be non-notable fan-fiction. It's admittably fan-created alternate history by User:Johnny Pez. A google search of Drowned Baby Time Line and Drowned Baby Timeline both come up with a handful of hits, however two of those hits are the wikipedia and answers.com wiki entries, and the remainder appear to be either blog entries, submissions to short story database, and a link to a Flickr.com photo archive [4], [5]. Now I'm of the belief that while the article appears to be well written, it's non-notable. I don't want to generate any ill-will, however, and I wanted a second opinion before I submit to AfD. Do you think this should be submitted for deletion? Thanks. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 14:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is an extremely difficult case. I oppose the deletion because the article is well written and on a signifigant topic (it is of use and interest to the reader). Others (including yourself I assume)) can argue that it is not encyclopedic...

Your certainly going to upset the authors, who clearly worked very hard on this. I think you will also make the reader slightly worse off than they are now by deleting it. Therefore I advise against it, but accept the logic from which you could base a contrary position. Its very much aprocess vrs. outcome debate.

Sam Spade 16:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Addition need Attention

Sam, thanks for yur help so far. Now I had added a sub-heading to Ayyavazhi, Ayyavazhi#Phenomenology. Please take a look and help me if it need any modifications. Thank you. - Vaikunda ^{(<.^.>)} Raja

Category:EU security?

Hey Sam,

Whatever happened to that handy-dandy Category:EU security you set up a while ago. I'm setting up an article on Petersberg tasks, but the category seems gone! Any idea?

Greets, The Minist e r of War ^(Peace) 14:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, found it. Apparenetly its renamed to Category:European Union security. I had tried that out, but capitalised the S (European Union Security). Doh. Thanks anyway! The Minist e r of War ^(Peace) 15:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your email

Sam, with respect to this email you sent me:

apologies for reproducing your email without consent. however...

I only have one account. have an admin check if you don't believe me. I don't generally see the point in facades.
telling you that you are violating NPOV is not trolling. whether or not you really are doing it might be a matter for discussion, of course, but you don't get an exemption just because it violates your self-image.
if you are a real person with a real life, then please use your real name when you email me.
I'm sorry if I'm adding more stress to your life.

thanks. Ted 22:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Case: Electric Universe Concept

You have indicated that you are willing to accept an assignment as a mediator. I have assigned this case to you. If you don't want to take the case on, just say so at the bottom of the request, delegate it to someone else and update the case list accordingly. Before your begin the mediation please read the suggestions for mediators. You can also review earlier mediation cases to get an understanding for possible procedures. --Fasten 09:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Vandalism In Metal Articles

Hi, I've been visiting Wikipedia for a long time, but I've just created an account. I've visited many metal articles and one thing which is of concern is that a vandal by the username User:Leyasu is at large in Wikiworld and is tampering with established articles. Some of the articles are Classic metal, Gothic metal, Glam metal, etc. Since, he has also reverted edits by you, I am informing you that I have reported that user to the administration. Check out this page - Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. The user thinks everything else is POV and just what he himself edits is correct. Also, he sent me a threatening message, that if I do not stop reverting, he will inform administration. I did his work myself. He now says, that their is no genre called Classic metal. So, I request you to put classic metal in your watchlist and revert his further moves if they are POV.

Gothic Hero 17:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Leyasu|this section]] of the 3RR noticeboard to see the ongoing discussion and proof i have of this users Sockpuppetry and vandalism. Ley Shade 17:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

East Prussia evacuation

Hello.I am not sure how this Wikipedia thing works,but after reviewing this article,I think Sam Spade's contribution to be the most fair,accurate and balanced. The term "evacuation" is a complete failure as a title,and it is doubtfull that anyone researching this topic will ever use this term in searches. It was a flight of civilian refugees and indeed a "holocaust" (that word being around long before WW Two and certainly not reserved for any specific group).The subject of German suffering is always "in dispute' and "controversial" and subjecte to grueling demands for proof of veracity,well beyond the accepted norm,and this in itself smacks of racial stereotyping. Respectfully,www.exulanten.com

Image Tagging for Image:Boßelstrecke wbkoog.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Boßelstrecke wbkoog.JPG. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 06:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot

Your bot complained about : Image:Boßelstrecke wbkoog.JPG

It is an image from the german wiki, as is explained on the image page. Would you be able to help resolve the matter? Sam Spade 20:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-tagged it as {{no license}}. If you want to complain, talk to the person who tagged it, User:Urshyam, who's been rather indiscriminantly flagging everything without a license tag as "no source". --Carnildo 00:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in this case its less amatter of complaining, and more amatter of trying to find my way thru the copyright bureaucracy (which isn't exactly my area, if you havn't noticed ;)

The image in question has acreative commons copyright, as evidenced here:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Bo%C3%9Felstrecke_wbkoog.JPG

where I found it... Can you give me any advice or assistance as to what to do? Thank you, Sam Spade 06:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest tagging it as {{cc-by-sa-2.0}}, and asking someone who speaks German to verify that the rest of the text on the German image description page is consistent with the claimed license. --Carnildo 07:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm German. Both tags are the same! Weapon X (de) 18:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sam Spade 08:02, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VIP report: Sam Spade

Hello Sam Spade. Note that a Vandalism in progress report concerning you was moved to the Administrators' noticeboard for outside input. If you would like to comment, please see WP:AN#VIP alert: Sam Spade. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 07:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Per the mediation case you brought to my attention, this is not necessary. I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 08:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

thank you, please one question

thank you for your user talk message, but honestly I am angry . I tell you story from the beginning : I am Dr Philip who sent an article titled (pert em hru).I know of course that pert em hru is called nowadays Book of dead which is already an article in Wikipedia . someone called choess redirected my article which means actually hiding of my article although I explain some imprtant points:1- the name of the book as book of dead is wrong 2- I mentioned to an important points which are not clear in original article as kingdom of Osiris and negative confession. So I hope to redirect pert em hru again to be available to all lovers of wikipedia and I hope to hear from you again,thank you Dr. Philip

I'll have a look, thanks for bringing this to my attention, Sam Spade 11:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please join [[Talk:Book_of_the_Dead#User talk:Sam Spade#thank you, please one question|this talk page discussion]]. Cheers, Sam Spade 12:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please, one moment

thank you, once more, for your interest ,but one moment, please,I noticed for the first time that a great number of contributions are subjected to deletion.Deletion is a simple word and an easy act.I think there is a better policey i.e. redirection of these passages to the related article e.g. redirect the passage titled ,,Isis in Literature,,either to,,Isis,,article or to Apuleius article because it contains the marvellous description of Isis by the great writer Apuleius.And so on in another contributions subjected to deletion . By this we respect every cotributer and let the reader to be the judge.You know encyclopedic work is a work in thought and every idea whatever small and tiny may lead to a great revolutions.What is more the work needs great patience and broadmind.thank you very much.Dr.Philip

Ayyavazhi Phenomenology

No doubt, that Ayyavazhi is so far misunderstanded everywhere.

Frequently, The birth place of Ayyavazhi (kanyakumari district) use to compare Vaikundar with Narayana Guru and Chattambi Swamikal, addressing him as a saint. They did not say him as god incarnate even religiously. They were completely unaware of the scripture Akilattirattu Ammanai. The day of incarnation of Vaikundar (march 3) was a holiday for the district. But only a very few of the population of the district know that Ayyavazhi had a seperate scripture. They simply mistook that the people of Ayyavazhi are worshipping a saint.

Then the area around kanyakumari, (districts of Tirunelveli and Tuticorin) which had quite a large number of Ayyavazhi population. The population not even know that there is a religion Ayyavazhi. Even in wikipedia some one who was setteled in Tuticorin, i think it's User:Sundar told some days back that he was a native of Ettayapuram (a village in Tuticorin) and many of his relatives spread across the district of Tirunelveli. (see:Talk:Thoothukudi) He said i did not know even a bit about Ayyavazhi. He finds hard to belive that there were 7000 worship centers and about a million followers. This was even accepted by some other Tamil wikipedian users. But from this year (march 4) the Ayya Vaikunda Avataram was announced as a holiday by the government for those two districts of Tirunelveli and Tuticorin. Now there are claims for holiday announcement for the districts of Chennai and Virudhunagar. Also these districts have a large number of Ayyavazhi population. But still Ayyavazhi remains unknown for the outer world, mainly because of the fact that the scripture is completely unknown and hence unknown the deviation of Ayyavazhi.

And the universal opinion about Ayyavazhi too is mistaken as merely an offshoot of Hinduism. I accept that Ayyavazhi had a very strong connection with Hinduism (like that of Christianity to judaism). But not as an offshoot of that. But this view could be brought to an end by revealing the ideological deviation of Ayyavazhi further more.The story available in wikipedia about Ayyavazhi is quite enough to understand that, but still to go. - Vaikunda ^{(<.^.>)} Raja

Yes, your contributions here are quite extensive, perhaps the most extensive overview of ayyavazhai available in english? Sam Spade 22:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

This user thinks it is ironic that thanks for supporting Cyde's successful RFA came in the form of a userbox.

Here's a userbox for you. --Cyde Weys 04:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ford Foundation grants to Political Research Associates

Sam, if you are still wondering why Ford gives the big bucks to PRA, you need look no further than Gatekeeper (politics). In fact, your participation in the debate on the talk page of that article might help to sort things out. --HK 07:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Bund maadchen.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bund maadchen.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 14:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Electric universe Mediation

I think we "crossed messages in the post". Thanks again for your help. I was wondering whether you might tackle another NPOV policy issue to which I have yet to have resolved, I can open another Mediation page with a description? --Iantresman 17:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it requires formal mediation? I can get more done as an ordinary wikipedian than as a mediator ;) Sam Spade 18:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United States Bill of Rights

Hi, I'm soliciting Wikipedia:Peer review#United States Bill of Rights comments from people who contributed to the FA on the 1st Amendment, since there doesn't seem to be any response at PR. Many thanks, Kaisershatner 21:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with a new Wikipedist

Hello there! it's being a while since the last time that I requested your help. I have this new user in this article, Talk:History of the Ecuadorian-Peruvian territorial dispute, that is creating a lot of controversies:

He is clearly attempting to push his own POV (that is, an Ecuadorian POV in this war)
Has made editions without having reliable sources
Started a flame war with me previously, and now he is treating me to cause even more trouble, namely accusing me of being the trouble of the page.

Please, read the last discussion and drop some ideas to calm this new user. I would gladly appreciate that. Cheers! and I hope to hear from you. Messhermit 02:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature with Template:Vip

I just wanted to let you know that on the talk page for ISKCON you've signed using the Vip template, but you gave your user name as the "user" parameter, while the template assumes it will be an unlabeled first paratemer, i.e., {{{1}}}. I'm not sure if the template changed since you started using it, but I just wanted to let you know because your name doesn't actually appear anywhere in the signature unless you view the wiki text and see the template call. bmearns, KSC_(talk) 11:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thats true in afew places because they deleted that template or some such. I don't really care tho. If you think its a big deal you can change them to say my name or something, but I won't bother. Thanks for the note tho, how is the ISKCON article doing btw? its been a long time... Sam Spade 16:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you're not worried, I'm not worried, I mostly just wanted to let you know so it didn't keep happening on accident. I didn't read all the way through the article, I just needed a copy of the mantra. bmearns, KSC_(talk) 17:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Jack2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Jack2.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.