Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:31, 6 December 2008

Account name

I gather the developers are unwilling to reset the password on Peter Damian. I can help with that to some extent, let me explain what is involved and you can decide whether you're interested:

• I can rename User:Peter Damian to something of your choice, say User:Peter Damian (old) or similar.
• I can then rename this account, User:Peter Damian II to User:Peter Damian in its place.

That will allow you to edit as Peter Damian, but the contributions you made under that name would be reallocated to the name you chose in its place. Let me know if that appeals to you and I will do the necessary renames. WJBscribe (talk) 11:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Will that would be a good idea. Peter Damian II (talk) 20:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. WJBscribe (talk) 10:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Dark ages

The definition of a term (i.e. 'Dark Ages') in an encyclopedia such as this should respect both the definitions given in other encyclopedias or dictionaries, and the way the term is used in other authoritative sources. Regarding the first, the two dictionary definitions below agree in the 500-1000 definition, although Collins correctly notes that it is 'occasionally used' to refer to the whole medieval period. Regarding the second, I have never come across the use of 'Dark Ages' by a modern historian to refer to anything but the period before the 12th century renaissance. The only disagreement seems to be whether the Dark Ages end with the Carolingian renaissance, or with the growth of the universities after the millenium. The article Dark Ages also does not mention that the term is relativistic anyway, meaning the dark ages in the Latin West. See the insightful quote by Russell.

Dark ages: a term once used to describe the period of Western European history from c.500 to c.1000, but misleading because of its negative implications, probably due to the fall of the Roman empire, the subsequent migrations and invasions by Goths and other peoples, and the supposed lack of learning during the period. (Penguin Encyclopedia).

Dark ages: 1. The period from about the 5th century A.D. to about 1000 A.D., once considered an unenlightened period. 2. (occasionally) the whole medieval period. Collins English Dictionary.

The diagram accompanying and illustrating the doctrine shows up already in the second century CE Boethius incorporated it into his writing, and it passed down through the dark ages to the high medieval period, and from thence to today.

In order to understand how the theory of analogy arose we have to bear in mind the history of education in the Latin-speaking western part of Europe. During the so-called dark ages, learning was largely confined to monasteries, and people had access to very few texts from the ancient world. This situation had changed dramatically by the beginning of the thirteenth century. The first universities (Bologna, Paris, Oxford) had been established, and the recovery of the writings of Aristotle supplemented by the works of Islamic philosophers was well under way.

The period in the history of Latin Europe after that of the "Fathers of the Church" has traditionally been called the "dark age", because very few writings were produced then. This was followed by what has sometimes been called "The Carolingian Renaissance", associated with the court of Charlemagne, toward the end of the eighth century. The political writers of the ninth century—Hincmar of Rheims, Rabanus Maurus, Jonas of Orleans etc.—are not household names, yet they gave expression to ideas that were important throughout the rest of the middle ages, in particular ideas about the role of a king and the difference between king and tyrant.

Our use of the phrase 'the Dark Ages' to cover the period from 600 to 1000 marks our undue concentration on Western Europe. In China this includes the time of the Tang dynasty , the greatest age of Chinese poetry, and in many other ways a most remarkable epoch. From India to Spain, the brilliant civilisation of Islam flourished. [Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, II.7 'The Papacy in the Dark Ages'

The revival of philosophy after the Dark Ages (roughly 525 - 750) was a drawn-out process. (Peter King, 'Philosophy in the Latin Christian West:750-1050', in Gracia and Noone).

See also this excellent article by Franklin, which I have referenced in Misplaced Pages before. "No psychological insight is needed to guess Petrarch's motives in pretending that a thousand years of darkness had ended with himself."

Parole reminder

The terms of your parole are:

• He may edit within his own user space.
• He may edit WP:RFAR and any associated pages (including arbitrators' talk pages, if appropriate) for the specific and limited purpose of appealing his ban and requesting an unconditional (or less conditional) unblock.
• He may contribute to and offer comments on FT2's discussion of "the situation" (Damian's edits to the Arbcom 2007 election, subsequent block, oversight, etc) at whatever page FT2 designates.
• He may not edit other pages without permission of Arbcom.
• Any harassment or wikihounding of FT2 shall be grounds for reimposition of the indefinite ban.
• Any admin may re-impose Jimbo's block for violation of these conditions.
• These conditions will remain in force until vacated by Arbcom.

So until arbcomm, in its usual leisurely fashion, reconsiders your terms, edits such as this violate condition 4 of your parole William M. Connolley (talk) 15:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Fine - I did that only so as to avoid editing mainspace articles and have the discussion here. Presumably I now have to delete the message on the talk page, at risk of them coming here and the article is, heaven forbid, improved? And I have already said I am not interested in some discussion by FT2. Peter Damian (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The terms of your parole are clear. You are not allowed to edit mainspace, or mainspace talk pages, or indeed my talk page or any other users, except as covered by items 1-3. You said Presumably you don't object if I leave a message to warn others on the Talk:Dark ages about that? It does not seem unreasonable. Yes, I do object. Your parole is clear; don't push against it. Please don't violate its terms again William M. Connolley (talk) 16:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I've blocked you for 12h for this . I specifically reminded you that your parole prohibited such edits, and you immeadiately responded by making one. Ah well William M. Connolley (talk) 16:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

(e/c)I don't particularly see any reason for anyone to capriciously revert your out of terms edits, unless of course you start making it a point to edit beyond your editing terms, at which point we'll have to make the point that you shouldn't. What you might consider doing is writing on the dark ages at length within your user space, and asking someone else to inform the editors at Talk:Dark Ages that you wish to continue the conversation here.--Tznkai (talk) 16:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back

Any roads. Ceoil (talk) 16:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with you people?

I asked earlier about this ... but why is PD blocked from editing articles? What's wrong with you people? Creating content is what we're all here for, it's what PD is most appreciated for, it's where he wasn't causing trouble. I also suggested this to FT2 who replied 'I'm way ahead of you'. Tznkai, WMC, you blocks were ill conceived, unthoughtful and unhelpful. --Duk 16:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know entirely for sure - Thatcher is the one who put down the unblock conditions, so your smartest avenue (although I advise against it for humanitarian reasons) is to complain to him. I do however, believe there is great value to everyone involved when a restricted user follows their restrictions: especially when they are simple and easy to understand. Agitating against them in a number ways can make sense - but violating them doesn't. It literally invites a block.--Tznkai (talk) 16:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)