| Revision as of 16:01, 25 March 2008 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,646 editsm Dating comment by Nmate - ""← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:06, 27 March 2008 edit undoSvetovid (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers8,869 edits →Great Moravian empire: commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
| MarkBA complains because I forced him that let he wipe the proto Slovak-state before the Hungarian conquest from history of Nitra yesterday.''Cheers'' | MarkBA complains because I forced him that let he wipe the proto Slovak-state before the Hungarian conquest from history of Nitra yesterday.''Cheers'' | ||
| ] (] • ]) <small>—Preceding ] was added at 16:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ] (] • ]) <small>—Preceding ] was added at 16:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| ==Advice== | |||
| Do have a look at the following articles: ], ] and specifically ], ], and ].<br>I will just assume that you keep repeating these fallacies in your comments simply because you are not aware of them and haven't studied critical thinking and not because you want to convince people by being intellectually dishonest.<br>Using these fallacies may make your comments seem like objective and truthful to you, but anybody with good critical thinking skills and experience in an intellectual debate will expose them easily.<br>I want to help you improve your communication skills. You will see that it will pay off in the future.--] (]) 23:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:06, 27 March 2008
 Archives |
Von Neumann "Personality"
I did not write the original text (I am only reinserting what was deleted) so I can not give the exact source for everything, although at least some of it seems to come from Notes: #1. Most of what is contained within the paragraph conforms with everything I have read about von Neumann. My only point in reinserting this material is that I believe it has a legitimate and important place in any portrait of von Neumann. If someone else can work it into better shape, great! I may even try to do so myself.
Von Neumann
Sorry but I mistakenly placed my response to your message in your archives. Please look there. Again, sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.1.17 (talk) 16:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Roman Catholic Church
Hello Squash Racket, I was wondering if you would like to come vote for this article to become an FA. I have done extensive reworking and I would like to know what you think. Thanks! NancyHeise (talk) 01:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for coming over to the page and giving me your comments. I addressed them to your satisfaction I hope. Let me know what you think. Thanks again! NancyHeise (talk) 20:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I contacted the user you recommended and I appreciate your comments. NancyHeise (talk) 13:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Hungarian Americans
Hi Squash racket, thanks for fixing any mistakes I made. I am trying to correct nationality in the lead sentences per wp:mosbio. For people born in Hungry and then naturalized here it can be a little less cut and dry. I would go with "Hungarian-born American" as a last resort unless duel nationality can be established. --70.109.223.188 (talk) 17:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Kingdom of Jerusalem
Hi Squash Racket, thanks for your help on the Kingdom of Jerusalem article - but yes, I do argue that that reference is not necessary. There are two reasons that it is not - firstly, it is from another encyclopedia. Britannica is of course a better encyclopedia, but it's very odd to use one encyclopedia as a source for another, especially since anything they say should be equally transparently sourced, and we can just use whatever sources they use. Secondly, the very basic definition of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, a crusader state founded in 1099, does not need a source. Every source will agree on this simple fact, and there is no possible way for there to be confusion or controversy about it, so it is unnecessary to give a reference for it. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oh my...are FA requirements really that strict these days? I find that a reference for every statement is ugly and distracting. I cannot even attempt to read the Israel article! I don't think that's a good idea at all. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey again, I've just created a Crusades task force as part of the Middle Ages WikiProject, so I thought you might be interested in helping out. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Great Moravian empire
Szia Squash Racket! We do not know each other yet, but I see it how you are interested in the Hungarian topics. Did you revise all of the sources on the talk page? MarkBA complains because I forced him that let he wipe the proto Slovak-state before the Hungarian conquest from history of Nitra yesterday.Cheers Nmate (talk • contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 16:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Advice
Do have a look at the following articles: Fallacy, List of fallacies and specifically Ignoratio elenchi, Straw man, and Poisoning the well.
I will just assume that you keep repeating these fallacies in your comments simply because you are not aware of them and haven't studied critical thinking and not because you want to convince people by being intellectually dishonest.
Using these fallacies may make your comments seem like objective and truthful to you, but anybody with good critical thinking skills and experience in an intellectual debate will expose them easily.
I want to help you improve your communication skills. You will see that it will pay off in the future.--Svetovid (talk) 23:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)