Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:17, 2 October 2002

Hello there, Welcome. Who are these people you are writting articles about? What have they done to merit inclusion in this encyclopedia? One of the things Misplaced Pages is not is a homepage provider. You are more than welcome to create just about anything over at Metapedia. --mav

Lir. I have responded to your questions on my talk page. If for some reason you can't edit that page then please post your messages here. --mav

Well, I've got to go to bed. Talk to you later. --mav

Hi Lir. Great stuff you're writing, but plase watch the CAPS lock key. We don't put names in capitals. I'll fix the ALVIN TOFFLER page you've made. -- Tarquin (oh well. Someone else beat me to it... ;-)

(reply to your comment on my page) It's been merged into Alvin Toffler, a page which already existed. Your text has not been deleted. It's a good idea to do a search before creating a new page, to avoid duplication. -- Tarquin

Hi Lir,

I'm User:Bobdobbs1723 and I noticed your edits on Anarchism. I'll read through them to find your train of thought. I just figured something out when I was editing (I still feel a fool) that may really help. At the bottom of the edit screen is a 'Preview' button. Use it, and it will provide a formatted page below the edit window so you can see what it looks like without posting 50 times in a row. My problem was (and possibly yours too), is that when I hit the button, due to my screen size and resolution, the preview page posted below, and what I was looking at didn't appear to change at all. So I thought it wasn't working..... Live and learn. Oh four tildes '~' in a row will put your name and timestamp after your message. Three just leaves your name. Have fun. Dobbs 16:39 Oct 2, 2002 (UTC)

I'm posting here so you can read it quickly: "Lir seems eager and a newbie as well. I'm going over to his Talk page and try and describe searching before starting new articles, and reading the talk page to get an idea of what everyone before you has done and is trying to achieve. Most anarchists I tend to meet seem to have developed their understanding from more general work and bits and pieces of popular descriptions. Our more doctrinaire and rigorous work describing the distinctions is a bit enlightning and confusing when people are first exposed."

That is posted from the Anarchism:Talk page. You can get there by clicking on Talk Page, located under Page Options on the left side of your browser window, when you are on the Anarchism topic page. (I'm not trying to talk down - BTW - I just don't know how much you know and am being better safe than sorry).

Your changes on the Anarchism page were reverted, and I didn't want you to take it the wrong way. As you can see, there has been quite a bit of discussion on how to approach the subject, and your changes edited out much information that many others felt necessary to illustrate the distinctions between forms of anarchist philosophy. Libertarian Socialism is a synonym of Anarchism, not something different, it just describes a specific type and style of Anarchism (from your Summary of your changes). Your energies might be better spent reading through the discussion, reading the page and finding out where your philosophy of Anarchism fits, and expanding that section or page. It's not that what you were trying to do wasn't good, it was just too specific for the main page. Dobbs 17:31 Oct 2, 2002 (UTC)

Hi, Lir... I reverted your changes on anarchism, not because they weren't good, but because they sort of went against the structure we had decided on for the pages (like Dobbs said)... anyhow, you might want to check out Libertarian socialism and hack at that a bit. Graft

So I see you take offense to my revert of Anarchism. This is fine, I don't particularly care if we discuss before reverting. At any rate, my reason for doing so was, because, if you'll read the archived discussion on the Talk:Anarchism page, you'll see that there was a substantial conflict over who got ownership of the term anarchism, and not everyone agreed that "libertarian socialist" was uniquely synonymous with "anarchism". Many of the anarcho-capitalists here felt that "anarcho-capitalism" had just as much of a right to the anarchist label as libertarian socialism did. And given that many prominent historical anarchists (like Max Stirner, John Henry McKay, et al.) were NOT libertarian socialists, this has a lot of credence to it. So, anarchism, we felt, should be a meta-page introducing the various strains of anarchism, with sub-pages discussing the various strains in detail. Graft

Lir, please... We came to the current situation of placing a meta-like page on anarchism at "anarchism" and the page on what we usually call anarchism at "libertarian socialism" after a while of thrashing between anarchists and anarcho-capitalists. Your edits don't fit in with the flow of the page; that's why Graft removed them for now. If you don't like the structure of the pages, please don't just put material that doesn't fit into them; talk about it on the talk page. Thanks! DanKeshet

Yeah, if you keep on like this, we will be reduced to total anarchy, which would be a richly ironic source of merriment if the resulting chaos weren't so darn annoying ;-) --Ed Poor

Also, you have been putting your messages on people's "User" pages. Your comments to a particular user should go on his or her "Talk" page. David "Anarcosocial-communist" dePaoli ;)

A user's talk page is linked on the sidebar and the bottom of each user's page. It's entitled, appropriately, "Talk page".

Lir, a lot would be achieved by your engaging in discussion instead of continuing with this fruitless edit war. You clearly have a different viewpoint of what the 'anarchism' page should be - can you try and explain it for us, instead of drastically altering the structure that the rest of us happen to agree on? Graft

I don't understand this debate. His "edits", at best, violate NPOV (example, "Anarchists loathe capitalism.") and at worst amount to nothing more than vandalism. His combative, rude and disrespectful actions and comments clearly outweigh his contributions. He should be banned. David dePaoli