Current time: Tuesday, December 31, 2024, 14:56 (UTC)

Template:Wikipedia:Picture of the day/December 31, 2024 To include this picture of the day on a page, add the text {{pic of the day}}.

Leave a message (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&action=edit&section=new)

User talk:Sam Spade/ - archive

Quote

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke

Art

User:Sam Spade/Art and artists

Contents

1 Leave a message (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sam_Spade&action=edit&section=new) 2 User talk:Sam Spade/ - archive 2.1 Quote 2.2 Art 2.3 Ayya Vazhi 2.4 Human 2.5 Passover & Pentecost 2.6 Thanks 2.7 Thanks 2.8 Neo-liberalism and neo-conservativism. 2.9 Amicable but serious 2.10 Existence of God merger 2.11 User:Vaikunda Raja 2.12 sam spade 2.13 Thanks 2.14 Thanks and Ayya Vazhi 2.15 err.... menu

Ayya Vazhi

Thanks, Sam for the compliment you said about me to Vaikunda.

Human

My pleasure. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:38, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Passover & Pentecost

Hi Sam, just wondering what the point was in trying to disambiguate Passover from Pentecost. Passover or Pesach is the Jewish holiday, and Shavuot occurs 7 weeks later. Pentecost is the Christian holiday that occurs seven weeks after Easter. I'm sure you know all this, so I'm simply curious what your intentions were. JFW | T@lk 17:39, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pentacost used to redirect there [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pentacost&action=history). Since you opposed the disambig (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Passover&diff=0&oldid=15451330), I redirected it to Pentecost, and placed a disambig there (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pentecost&diff=0&oldid=15451916). I find your reverts and the reasoning for them unhelpful. Sam Spade 17:43, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the redirect. It obviates the need for disambiguation at the top of Passover. JFW | T@lk 17:59, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

We still havn't resolved the issue of your reverts regarding the disambig header @ Pentecost however... Sam Spade 20:02, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the reader should be able to "find what they are looking for", but the previous version was misleading and incorrect.

Old version:

Note: This article is mostly about the Christian holiday of Pentecost. For the Jewish holiday of "Pentecost" see the articles on Shavuot, or passover

My version:

The name of the Jewish holiday Shavuot is commonly translated as "Pentecost".

There is only one small difference between these disambiguation lines, namely the mention of Passover. The article itself makes it abundantly clear that Pentecost is a Christian holiday, and as I stated quite clearly in my edit summary, the term "pentecost" only bears distant causal relationship and should certainly not be disambiguated at the top of the article. As far as I'm concerned there is nothing to resolve, Jack. JFW | T@lk 21:59, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pentacost used to redirect to passover. Now it redirects to pentecost. Seems obvious to me that a link to passover be handy in the disambig. I agree that may not be perfectly precise, but disambigs arn't ment to be. They are rather a resource to help people find the article they are looking for. Sam Spade 22:03, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Continued @ Talk:Pentecost#disambig_debate.2C_copied_from_my_talk_page. Sam Spade 22:05, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for considering me an interesting person. Thankfully Wikipedia is populated by a large number of fascinating people, which makes the discourse quite remarkable.

The crux of our discussion seems to be the linking of Passover. Apart from the erroneous redirect, on what grounds do you think this is necessary? I'm still open to persuation. JFW | T@lk 22:44, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why would someone confuse Passover and Shavuot any more than Passover and Sukkot (the other pilgrimage festival)? Disambiguation is very noble, but there is a nice box at the bottom of the Shavuot page linking all Jewish holidays. If you feel very strongly that passover should be mentioned at Pentecost I will not revert you. JFW | T@lk 23:05, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I can quite agree with a wait & see approach.

... and all that over a few words at the top of a page :-) JFW | T@lk 23:12, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the info. Much appreciated. A.S. Brown 05:54, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)A.S Brown

Your very welcome, glad to have you! Sam Spade 22:07, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help. Shanekorte 04:54, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Likewise! Cheers, Sam Spade 22:07, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gladly! Sam Spade 00:07, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Neo-liberalism and neo-conservativism.

Neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism are in fact strongly related to one another. You appear to be confused with the terms in so far as neo liberalism refers to Neo-liberal as opposed to Keynesian economics (which dominated economic policy from the thirties until the mid seventies), and to free market global economics of the Thatcher-Reagan and Post-thatcher Reagan (present) period. Neo-conservative refers to Neo-conservative political policy a la Reagan/Maggie Thatcher and to the political ideology of Paul Wolfowitz, Leo Strauss, the PNAC and dominant members of the current Bush administration. Neo-liberal economic policies are central to the policies of neo-conservative administrations. User:193.1.172.163

I agree they are closely linked, from what I know neo-liberal is a broader catagory, including folks like Clinton. Neo-Con is a slightly more morally "conservative" (altho it is truely ridiculous to call them conservative) subset of neo-liberalism. What inspired this? Sam Spade 14:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Amicable but serious

Sam, I am back trying to negotiate with this editor , which is a positive. However the issue cannot advance because cited works are not sufficient to break his defences. There has to be arbitration soon now. would you please organise the complete flagging of this to achieve a balance . I have endlessly cited and tried. I'm fond of the battle and the writer,and the argument is rather revealing and at least brings the subject into the present but this is a terrific block and is not an issue I should walk away from , nor should WP policy be ignored . Ill forhtwith see if I can simplify myself down to FK, and save further time . Fiamekeeper 21:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Existence of God merger

I'm attempting to develop a consensus in favor of merging the Arguments against the existence of God and the Arguments for the existence of God articles. A beta version of the resulting article is available at Existence of God. To date, there seems to be consensus in favor of this merger on the "for" talk page, I'm now trying to get a consensus together on the "against" talk page. Please visit Talk:Arguments against the existence of God to weigh in. I'm copy-and-pasting this message to everybody who has contributed to that talk page. crazyeddie 05:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User:Vaikunda Raja

Iam Vaikunda Raja, a new editor to wikipedia.I was warned for vandalism, and the request from me is, kindly review my articles and give me hints to follow.

sam spade

What alcohol did sam spade drink?

Hefeweizen. Sam Spade 23:32, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very much for your response-Vaikunda Raja

Thanks and Ayya Vazhi

Thanks for the compliment, Sam when you mentioned me to Vaikunda. Well, from what I read in their web site, http://www.vaikunt.org , Ayya Vayzi religion is a new Hindu sect that developed in Tamil Nadu in the nineeteenth century. They have interesting beliefs. They believe that there is a Satanic-like figure, Kroni or Kalanemi (please see web site) who is partly responsible for the evil in the world. This Kroni manifests from age to age in various forms, such as Hiranksahipu, Ravana and Duryodhana from the Mahabharata. To destroy him, Vishnu incarnates in his avatars as Narasimha, Rama and Krishna. Caste prejudice is strongly condemned and it is believed that Vishnu empowered a man to be the Ayya Vaikunt avatar in the nineteenth century to begin the destruction of the evil that will finally disappear. When Vaikun mentions manu avatar, it means it is not a direct descent of Vishnu like Krishna but rather Vishnu enters the soul of a man and gives him power. (i.e., Parushrama, see avatar. According to their beliefs, Vishnu empowered a man of low caste to show the downtrowden the right way. He was ayya vaikunt and taught people the right way.

Additionally, like Smartas, they believe that Brahma, Vishnu and Siva are one and the same God. Also, they frown on icon worship and stress that God can be both with form and without form (can never be limiting) but like Arya samaj, they stress the formless God. Their web site is fascinating. I found it interesting. Raj2004 02:16, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have been trying to clean up some of the nice articles he has written, and thus learned a bit, but I think I should also have a look at this website! So much to do at the moment, I am beginning to read the Bhagavad Gita again, this time as translated by Edwin Arnold, and of course their is my mathematics! But slowly, I always find a way :)

Cheers, Sam Spade 03:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The web site was very helpful. It gives context to the article. Raj2004 10:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

err.... menu

umm.. err... yeah.

Hi Sam,

Just letting you know, I blatantly ripped off your menu formatting... (I acknowledged you at the bottom of my page though). If you dont like that I did that - feel free to leave me a message (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:UnlimitedAccess&action=edit&section=new) notifying me to remove it. Thanks! :) -UnlimitedAccess 11:15, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)