User talk:Tregonsee

re: Stoicism

Hi Tregonsee--absolutely, the changes make sense and I agree with them. I love the Stoics--they were trying so hard to live a life that made sense and make a more humane world. I wish there were more of them around today. Which books did you mean? --Pariah 03:34, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

Hi again! Wow--Rufus, Panatius, Posidonius, Musonius...I never realized there were so many Stoics writers. I have to admit, about 95% of what I know about Stoicism comes from Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, and what I was taught by a practicing Stoic (also the guy that told me about Hadot). The focus was always on the spiritual exercises, so I'll be looking forward to your additions on Stoic logic.

'Tis true--I read a lot of SF, esp. these days. If you're into the Dune series, it's worth reading Children of Dune (#3), as it's much better than Dune Messiah.

Also--thanks for the heads up on that link (now fixed--Viruses of the Mind). I intend to post a critique on my talk page when I get the time. I first heard about Dawkins & memetics a while back, but only recently started investigating when those articles caught my attention. Unfortunately, I really don't like what I see. The more I learn, the more memetics looks like fanciful psuedoscience; and Dawkins himself is scary. He pathologises religion without understanding it (and equating religion with its misuse); meanwhile this talk of mental infection conjures visions of Stalinesque "re-education" camps and One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest in my head. But then again, I am still researching...--Pariah 10:28, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)

On Friendship” and “Laelius de Amicitia

Hi. thanks for bringing that to my attention. Unfortunately, a short google search reveals that the source of the text is copyrighted [1] and we cannot use it. Very sorry about that. I have listed the two articles as copyright violations on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. We would need to start the article again from scratch if you are interested. About the redirect: This can be done very simple: Just add #REDIRECT [[PageName]] as the only text to the page that shall be redirected to another page. Also, if you make a redirect, make sure that there are no double redirects (click "What links here" on the menue on the left). Again, thanks for your contributions! Happy editing -- Chris 73 Talk 19:03, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

New Thought Movement

Hi. Thanks for the info on that one, too. To undo such a change, just click on "history", select the last good version, then "edit" this last good version and save it, You will get a warning that there is a newer version, just click OK, and you have reverted the article to a previous version. Happy editing -- Chris 73 Talk 13:54, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Inappropriate comment on talk page

That comment was not appropriate. Even if they were referring to the nickname of the subject of the article, which I doubt, saying that they love her does nothing to improve the article. Since noone else had ever edited that page, I used my administrative powers to delete it. Generally, comments should only go on talk pages if they are talking about the content of the article and how to improve it. Academic Challenger 05:52, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tregonsee. I'm working on WikiProject Stub sorting, and I noticed that your user page is tagged as a biographical stub. I think that category's intended for encyclopedia articles in the main namespace, so would you mind removing it in the interests of organization? (I believe the standard template to use in this situation is {{Userpage}}). Thanks. --David Wahler (talk) 02:11, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Too many capital letters

Hello. Please note my edits to Posidonius and history of geodesy (I moved the latter article to set the initial g in lower case) and see Wikipedia:Manual of Style concerning this. Michael Hardy 22:33, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Curtis Hopkins

Isee that you started work on an article on Emma Curtis Hopkins. We still need one! It doesn't have to be perfect or all-inclusive. A good stub is better than nothing. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:11, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good work!. Thanks for contributing that. I added some categories. Cheers, -Willmcw 20:37, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Posidonius corrections

Hi Tregonsee. Thanks for noticing. That was a good one. When I first started spell-checking it was a bit inefficient, but I think I have a better system now. Nice to meet you as well.Schmiteye 21:03, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]