User talk:Max rspct

>>PLEASE LEAVE YOUR MESSAGES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE>>>>

User talk:Max rspct/archive1 (25th Nov 2004 - 31st Oct 2005)

User talk:Max rspct/archive2 (1st Nov 2005 - 25th Nov 2005)

User talk:Max rspct/archive3 (28th Nov 2005 - 10th Dec 2005)

User talk:Max rspct/archive4 (11th Dec 2005 - 13th Dec 2005)

User talk:Max rspct/archive5 (13th Dec 2005- 12th April 2006)

User talk:Max rspct/archive6 (15th April 2006 - 19th May 2006)

User talk:Max rspct/archive7

FREE THE SITE

O child Anarchia, infinite promise
infinite carefulness
I listen, listen in the night
by the cradle deep as the night
is it well with the child?

The Dispossessed

---

Request

Could you have a look at Vision Thing's reversions at Anarchism and Anarcho-capitalism? He is reinserting unnecessary detail without discussion. -- infinity0 13:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Btw, did you get my email? -- infinity0 14:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you have IRC? -- infinity0 15:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Edited vesion of Battle of Boyra

You inserted citation needed links to an articel about the battle of Boyra.

Flt Lt. Hakimullah's flight did not engage Sikhand, I am not aware whether he claimed him as a kill. PAF definitely treats this as an air-to-air victory for Hakimullah. Visit PAF archives for this, as this is not topic of discussion and only trivia. I have offered as support the contents of a web-page operated by a former Comssioned Officer of PAF, which I believe os satisfactory for the topic. The Indian Airforce awarded AVSM to Wg. Cdr Sikhand, recorded in the IAF's gallantry and awards web-page, again this is not the topic's object of information. Air support for Pak Army in the battle of Boyra came in the second day, this is a known fact, for the reference of which you have to go through the archives of the Indian and Pak Govts, and is as such not citable. However, I am sure newspaper articles of the time would suffice. Please add this if you're aware of this, but as this is not a court trial, not every fact is being referenced. Chaudhury claimed a Gnat shot down, this was claimed by PAF. If you read the description of the battle, in the article, you will realise that the engagement was over in a matter of minutes and the downed Pak Pilots did not have scope to engage in Dogfights, only Chaudhury did, and he was not downed. This does not need seem to be in need of a citation as this is a known fact. 14 sabres were captured by the Indian Army when Dhaka surrendered, I am not sure why you want a citation for this, but official web-sites of the BAF and IAF will corroborate this.

The point of the article was to offer insight into the battle and not build a court-case for a trial. I have therefore included trivia and accepted and known facts without citation

If you have the references ..why don't you just put them in then? I did't ask for that many. --maxrspct in the mud 15:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Martha Stewart

You wrote: "Welcome to Wikipedia. Please familiarise yourself with it (Wikipedia:Tutorial, Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines) . What you have been writing is a plain, straight-forward appeal on behalf of celebrity criminal Martha Stewart. It is not my job to guide newbies in assimilating POV and this sort of stuff into articles...If you really want to give her version of events - present one side of the case and then source it from source. Don't speculate or do original research. This is not a place to dispute the courts findings unless they are seriously questioned by notable professionals, law people and academics - go onto a message board for that. Don't present it as fact unless it is. Whether its from supporters of M.Stewart, memorial builders, conspiracy theorists, gurning fans of Natalia Vodianova or anything else - unsourced POV appeals and waffle get deleted - policy and practice. Good luck -- max rspct leave a message 01:28, 21 April 2006 (UTC)"

It is not unheard of in the history of jurisprudence for a court to reach an unjust finding. Witness, for example, the recent spate of exonerations prompted by the Innocence Project. Consequently, while the justice system does, and I suppose must, assume that someone found guilty by a court is in fact guilty, it is not reasonable for the rest of us to make that assumption; rather, it is quite reasonable and proper for us to reserve judgment. The points I made about Stewart's trial were factual, and not speculative. That I didn't state evidence supporting her conviction, does not mean I deny that evidence; it merely reflects that fact that such evidence is already attested and well publicized. Thus my statement was not "a plain, straight-forward appeal on behalf of celebrity criminal Martha Stewart" but rather an effort to balance the impression created by the court's finding, by stating certain facts. - Palmleaf

Hogeye evading ban (again)

Ever since anarchism had the semi-protect removed, hogeye started editing with IPs (probably open proxies) again. User:64.159.81.81 is the one I'm dealing with most right now. Others include User:217.160.230.161, User:Beeboe and User:FreeJohnG, as well as a few IP's that have already been blocked. I suggest semi-protecting anarchism again, and blocking all the socks. Also, keep an eye on American individualist anarchism, which is a POV fork created by one of the Hogeye socks a while ago. It currently redirects to Individualist anarchism in the United States, but hogeye readded their POV fork after I reverted it back to the redirect (calling me an asshole in their edit summary no less). Thanks. The Ungovernable Force 02:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Bakunin

I don't have any objection to your short version of the commentary on Bakunin's anti-semitism. In fact, I just tried to add a reference to the Dreyfus Affair as a turning point for European intellectuals and radicals on the whole issue of anti-semitism. As I indicated in my earlier post, I think the longer versions of the Bakunin anti-semitism commentary give undue prominence to his anti-semitic writings, and the quotes people keep using are not properly referenced, so it is not possible to independently verify them. There are shorter and verifiable quotes that show Bakunin's anti-semitism and anti-Germanism (for example, his denunciation of Marx as "a German and a Jew"). Robgraham 16:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Chevaline

I'm not really surpised that you are considering leaving Wiki due to harrassment if you mess with others carefully crafted work in such an apparently POV manner. Knowing that Chevaline is still politically contentious especially among the disaffected left-overs of the old hard Left I was especially careful in crafting this piece to avoid POV. There are numerous references cited some of which do indeed substantiate the text that you have tagged without doing your research. These include numerous Civil Service discussion papers for Ministers now in the public domain at the Public Record Office, and in the papers from the recent Royal Aeronautical Society symposium cited. And you might also be old enough as I am to remember the extensive press coverage of Comrade Khuschev's threats to obliterate the UK at the time of Suez. If you want to amuse yourself by playing silly, sad, old leftie games then do it without destroying others work. Please remove your tag. Brian.Burnell 12:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Please do not leave pathetic, and stroppy personal attacks on my talkpage like that. That the USSR threatened to attack the UK alone with nukes (twice?) is a big claim. No I don't spend that much of my own time digging in in the PRO. If you have a source, SOURCE IT! POV? i just put a tag there. Please mind Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility. Where source? source it! --maxrspct in the mud 12:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The article is sourced. You simply couldn't be bothered to do the work to check the sources. Its not the job of other contributors to do your research for you. Brian.Burnell 13:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't start playing your violin at me! Maybe YOU should get thicker skin. For that claim in the article you must show the EXACT records as source.. not just a footnote. You did make personal attacks regarding my politcal persuasions and the note at the top of my page. I may take it off as it obviously attracts personal attacking from individuals who are looking to have ago at someone/something. --maxrspct in the mud 14:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for your help in getting my block lifted. I really appreciate it! The Ungovernable Force 21:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Good example of the way this place works. - max

Dangers of Angostura Bitters

You wrote:

I seem to recall that it is lethal to drink this type of bitters unadulterated/from the bottle. I may well be wrong , can anyone enlighten? -max rspct 13:43, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I gather that is just nonsense: there are no toxins there, it is just a matter of taste. If you can tolerate such a pungent bitter flavor and the high alcoholic content, then you can drink it. I did it as a kid (Yeeeeccch, never again!!!), and that was 45 years ago! But then, who would do that, and why? The keen flavors and subtle scents of Amargo de Angostura are enjoyed most as much as the benefits of Homeopatic medicines are reaped best: in small, minute quantities.

Regards, AVM 21:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I am still concerned tho.. as it was a hotel owner who told me.. A joke perhaps.. looking at the taste/bitterness of the stuff as u point out.--maxrspct in the mud 16:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Anarcho-capitalism as featured article

I have posted the anarcho-capitalism article to undergo a major review due to my belief that it is not up to the standards of being the best wikipedia has to offer. If you are interested in participating in the process please do. Blahblahblahblahblahblah 11:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Leonard Peltier Revert

G'Morning Max, I saw where you recently made a revert to the Leonard Peltier article, specifically to the opening paragraph. There had been a good bit of discussion, and agreement, concerning the intro on discussion page. Your revert returned the paragraph to the version which was essentially the cause of the debate, not the version upon which a consensus was reached. I am not trying to pick a fight, but I am curious what your reasoning was since you didn't leave a comment. Cheers! Cafe Irlandais 14:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree will your interpretion of the situation. The page is very much under debate and removing that tag and the other info isn't really proactive. --maxrspct in the mud 14:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe we may be discussing two different "situations". I am referring to a very narrow and well defined one, specifically the structure and writing of the opening paragraph and the debate surrounding what makes a good opening paragraph, not the whole article nor the status of the debate regarding the larger issues of the page. Based on your comment I can see that I failed to adequately delineate between the two, and for that I apologize.

The purpose of the edits to the introductory paragraph was to provide a concise overview that touches only briefly on the salient points that should properly be discussed in greater detail later in the article. That is the consensus to which I referred to my previous comment and why some info was removed from the intro.

Is the page very much under debate? Sure it is, and the tag, as such, probably belongs. But that type of thing is not something that I try to involve myself in. Besides, facts properly sourced and neutrally presented tend to resolve those issues. Again, sorry for any confusion that I caused. Sláinte! Cafe Irlandais 22:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

This user drinks mate

I nicked your mate user thing. It's terrific. Hope you don't mind. Kudos. tyx

Userbox support

The userbox was deleted so You just had a bunch of red text there, so i deleted it. Sorry if You wanted it there.Cameron Nedland 16:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Police raid protest april 20 06.jpg

Did you really create this work? I saw it in the Turtle Island News. Did you send it in? It looks like video, The Turtle Island News said that it was a frame of dramatic video. It's interlaced, did you shoot this? It says you are the creator, are you? Wuffyz 20:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

eh?.. no. well.. i manipulated it and uploadec it.. no copyright.. tag it with that if u want - i got it off the earlt external link on the Cal occupation. maxrspct in the mud 19:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Circlea.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Circlea.gif. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 19:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Boston Tea Party

Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [1]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 05:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Bruno-bbc.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bruno-bbc.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Liftarn 08:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Hugo Chavez

Not sure why you are reverting referenced content, here. Please read the talk page. Sandy 13:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

OH really!!? "giggles" bit is sourced? - max

Anarchism

Can you explain your revert? -- Vision Thing -- 17:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Siwa Oasis

I'm not sure of who've added this part, but I guess that's obvious vandalism. What do you think?

--TheEgyptian 19:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Chevaline2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chevaline2.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Udsieq 16:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Wizard (fantasy)

Because you have made comments on the Wizard (fantasy) talk page, I thought you might be interested to know of a Request for Comments: Talk:Wizard (fantasy)#Request for comment Goldfritha 02:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:AAFlight191 newspapers.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AAFlight191 newspapers.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. We need to know which newspapers you got it from so we can know whose copyright this belongs to. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 02:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

copyvio at wheatpaste

I put the copyvio notice yesterday, and the site seems to have died in the last 24 hours, however the exact same recipe was available at the site, and that looks pretty much like a copyvio. The site can still be seen at googles cache [2]. Even if the site was to be dead for good, that wouldn't mean that is not a copyvio anymore, right? SpiceMan (会話) 18:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

YAWN.. its just simple wheat paste.. isn't the notice a bit too zealous? maxrspct in the mud 18:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing/deleting sections of article

Could you please stop deleting the Murray Rothbard section out of Anarchism in the United States? Are you a vandal or do you have a legitimate reason for removing it?Anarcho-capitalism 20:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

He is not considered to be an anarchist. Go order someone else about mr evangelical original researcher - maxrspct ping me 22:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Of course he's considered to be an anarchist. Maybe not by you, but by almost all scholars. I just added a bunch of sources. Need more? There are tons more. By the way, you added Goodwin as a source for anarcho-capitalism being individualist anarchism (though apparently you thought you were putting her a source saying something else). Goodman doesn't explicitly specify that it's an individualist form of anarchism. She just say's a form of anarchism: "Although many anarchists today still subscribe to the values of Bakunin and Kropotkin, there are two new, divergent currents of anarchist thinking. One is anarcho-capitalism, a form of libertarian anarchism which demands that the state should be abolished and that private individuals and firms should control social and economic affairs." page 137Anarcho-capitalism 16:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

No.. either you have changed the wording or there are big differences in editions. It says right-wing libertarianism.. not libertarian anarchism. Read the last paragraph on that in her book. -- maxrspct ping me 23:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

That is an accurate quote above. She does say it's right libertarianism as well. There are two wings of libertarian anarchism, left libertarianism and right libertarianism. She is not saying that it's not anarchism. It is a right libertarian anarchism. By the way you shouldn't falsify the other sources. Do not claim that other sources say something they don't. Your honor 05:32, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I would like to add an external link in Arabic Language

  Hello Max, 

I a French man, living in Toulouse, FRANCE. I have a passion for Arabic language, which I am learning. And to help me and help others in order to learn vocabulary, I have created a web site. I tried to make a link towards this site in "Arabic Language", but it was removed. And I don't understand why. So I made changes, but now I can't edit external link. I don't want to make spamming or advertisement, just to share my work :

http://lang.arabe.free.fr/index_uk.php

  Thanks a lot and happy new year, 

François PINCE

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions[3] made on January 14 2007 to Anarchism

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. William M. Connolley 22:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Anglicization

I am reverting your recent re-Anglicization of an article about an American Airlines flight which crashed in the United States. According to the Wikipedia guidelines on the subject, articles about the U.S. would normally use American English. I see no reason why this should be an exception. --Orange Mike 23:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dawsonfieldcamels.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonfieldcamels.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Anishinaabemowin language Userbox

Aaniin, with great effort from User:Miskwito, we now have the oj series of Anishinaabemowin language userboxes. On the WP:IPNA/Nish page, we have a matrix of the possible categories for the oj series and the major dialect groupings. You can now add to your Userpage one of the oj userboxes that are available or you can help create a userbox for the dialect of your interest. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Babel#Ojibwe_language_userboxes for the full discussion. Miigwech. CJLippert 23:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

MFD comment

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Anarcho-capitalism. Comments requested. :) -- infinity0 01:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)