User talk:Carolmooredc

Thanks for visiting my Talk page. Please Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page and comments about the content of a specific article on the Talk page of that article. Thanks!

/My Sandbox 1 - /My Sandbox 2 - /My Sandbox 3 - /My Sandbox 4

Images

Nice job uploading all of the images. I already deleted the original one that was here for you. Thanks again for helping me out. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:11, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

RSN discussion

Carol, your comments have been the source of some discussion at Talk:Tom_G._Palmer#.22Criticism.22, and now at WP:RSN#LewRockwell.com. Cheers, DickClarkMises (talk) 23:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

That might have been too structured a proposal for people to deal with. In fact I had an idea for a whole chart. But never got together. So many wikipedia issues and articles, so little time... Commented on WP:RSN CarolMooreDC (talk) 23:58, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

panarchists blog

CarolMooreDC,

First, I want to thank you sincerely for the yeomans work you have done on the panarchy article. It is magnificent.

Clearly you are a person of many interests. Still, if you strongly believe in panarchy, I would like to invite you to be an author on our newly developed blog, currently using the address panarchists.wordpress.com. There is not much there yet, since I only started it up on Friday, but it has a lot of promise. I was part of a closed blog called Little Panarchy on Yahoo groups, started by a panarchist in Germany. He enrolled a number of the major players as contributors there: John Zube (Australia), Richard CB Johnsson (a Swede living in Beijing and LRC contributor), Michael Rozeff (LRC contributor), Gian Piero de Bellis (Switzerland), Adam Knott (Seattle area), and some others. That blog has since been shutdown since it became too much to manage for him. I've stepped in to keep the conversation going and hopefully enhance it.

Anyway, I wanted to thank you for what you have done for panarchy, and hope you will consider joining this blog sometime in the near future.

Dwight Johnson administrator for panarchists.wordpress.com --98.110.81.146 (talk) 16:29, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Responding there. CarolMooreDC (talk) 17:32, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

More gld info.

The South African Mint Company (Pty) Ltd is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the South African Reserve Bank (SARB). It was established on 1 September 1988 and in October 1990 moved from Pretoria to its current location at Gateway in Centurion. Its main function is to mint coinage under the Reserve Bank Act of 1989. The South African Mint can produce both legal tender and commemorative gold coins, although currently all the gold coins issued are legal tender. Decisions with respect to current and future coin programmes are taken by the Government at Cabinet level. The SARB requires Cabinet approval for planned coin issues, details of which are published annually in the Government Gazette. The coins are then struck by the SA Mint and made available for purchase by the public. The SA Mint currently Source [1] Another basic thing [2] .. I think it is pretty well known information. Regards, skip sievert (talk) 23:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ms Carol

I would like (with much appreciation ) for an objective eye, opinion and all that on the Arab Professor Nassim Taleb's talkpage pretty pls.LoveMonkey (talk) 00:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I took a peak. He looks very interesting. Article has lots of good sources, a few questionable, but read neither text nor sources carefully. But don't have time to figure out what is going on. Anti-Arab or anti-Libertarian/Austrian or anti-chaos bias - or all three?? Motivate me more. Too many articles, too little time. CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Still the same Ms Carol. Well..The article has a tenacious editor. Taleb as a epistemeological libertarian (aka means he's for Wikipedia) and a Metaphysical libertarian, gets all kinds of very unhappy with him, economists (that he calls conmen) with an axe to grind..Oh all three. Freedom is irrational, but so what. Reason never proves anything but self delusion, life itself is irrational. God is the generator of order and sumbebekos because God is freedom, and freedom is love. And you Ms Carol are one of the Good guys. Your time is always appreciated. LoveMonkey (talk) 17:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

[3]LoveMonkey (talk) 03:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

People have free will, as that they can make random decisions. Decisions that are not the by products of external stimuli but are decisions of human agency. If one flips a coin one still has to accept or not accept the coins outcome. By what internal standard does one overcome random choice? Since according to determinism there is no such thing as a random choice. According to determinism no one ever gets into the situation of Buridan's ass. Since that outcome is only one possible outcome no matter what we as individuals do. LoveMonkey (talk) 19:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I wish I had time to study the issues of that article since I do say that CONSCIOUSNESS IS THE NATURE AND PURPOSE OF REALITY and that memory, imagination and free will are its essence, creating the subatomic level on up. Meditate on it!!  :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 22:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Panpsychism. Love it!LoveMonkey (talk) 03:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I nominated the libertarian metphysics article for deletion.LoveMonkey (talk) 03:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I really didn't pay attention to what happened with Lassky entry but it did look overly long. I do think you need a source saying directly that his brand is called libertarian. Don't know if you had one. Voted keep. CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

@#$% Now the exact opposite is happening on the antitheism article where an administrator denies that antitheism as a concept could be behind theist persecution. Please help? Take a looky see on its talkpage.LoveMonkey (talk) 13:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It looks like they are removing stuff where no WP:RS uses word "antitheism." Something often down per WP:RS and WP:OR. Just have to hustle up good sources. CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

just fyi...

DC 8 (talk) (not certain if you've already received this notice)
--NBahn (talk) 11:07, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Christian Zionism in the United Kingdom

user:Slrubenstein is wondering whether this should go to AfD. I'm a bit dubious about the success of an AfD, perhaps we should just redirect to Christian Zionism or gut it to a stub and start all over, what do you think? Dougweller (talk) 18:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

From researching from the UK article it does turn out that that's where Xian zionism started. And there obviously are some groups. So there is enough for a stub or even a longer article. So the question is would there be more/different info than would be in the Christian Zionism article. I haven't quite gotten around to integrating that mess, but I enjoy doing that sort of thing, so maybe I'll take a look right now. So why not give it a few days and see what the Christian Zionism history section looks like when I'm done. CarolMooreDC (talk)

Do you plan to continue working on this? Dougweller (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thomas H. Greco, Jr.

Should this article be deleted? Let us know on the article talk page. Thanks! --Anthon.Eff (talk) 01:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

From the CSD talk page

Duplicated here:

Oh, I'm sorry. I should have pointed you to the right place rather than just telling you "not here"—how rude of me, and I apologise profusely.

The right place is Wikipedia talk:Files for deletion. Sorry again—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 23:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. After dealing with this for couple days did know what FFD was. But always good to make it a WP: link just in case.  :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 23:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Project together on Anti Zionism and True Torah Jews

I really do not understand why everyone is anonymous about their identity on FB and Wiki. I like the Amazon approach, put in a credit card, then with a real name you can make a review.

We share a lot and there is a lot I believe that we can learn together with this project.65.248.129.126 (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The best I can advise is to carefully read WP:Policies and maybe practice on less controversial articles because it can be very frustrating trying to add things to controversial articles if you don't understand the policies. Definitely thoroughly read the Talk pages of all articles you are considering editing to make sure a) you understand the content issues and b) you understand the process issues. Then keep reviewing the policies til it all starts to come together. CarolMooreDC (talk) 19:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Trust me I am to timid to make a real edit at this point, I am looking for someone that wants to bring subjects such as this to wiki - have you heard of this group? if not shouldn't they be in wiki for knowledge sake? if so shouldn't they be in Wiki? I read in your description that you were suprised to find subjects that came up in searches and not good information in Wiki, well here we are...one last thing, why do so few people use their real names? feel free to friend me in FB if you have interest.Chris Connolly 04:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snettie (talk • contribs)

They are in wikipedia under their parent organization, Neturei Karta. Please review WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE for why a group of a few tens, maybe a couple of hundred, should not be given more weight than is proper. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 05:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining what he was referring to. Obviously for a small group of 30 or 40 individuals they do get lots of publicity and notability. Haven't really read their article, just added a photo. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Avi, Carol, if you look at my links below you will see that you are completely wrong about the size of the group. Secondly I have enclosed an off subject reference on the Onita Community, a group of only 300 w/no importance in current events that has a Wiki page so that people can learn and not remain ignorant as I, Carol, you (we were are till recently) it seems in not realizing how large this group is. Will clean up later.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Community>Chris Connolly 08:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

They go by several names, Jews Against Zionism, Natrona & True Torah Jews each search can link to a central article. Neturei Karta is Aramaic, I do not want to infer that there is an intentional purpose of hiding this group but....to list a group by its Aramaic name - Here are some links so you don't have to go to the trouble of investigating yourself. I believe that your decision was made before you came to this discussion but nevertheless I hope you will investigate what I present here.

The first describes a meeting in 2007 with 1500 in attendance, this is not stating those that could not make the meeting. <http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/news/currentarticle.cfm?id=90>

Second is a visual shot of the meeting showing those in attendance. I would like to use this photo in the Article in English as opposed to the single current Aramaic reference you mention as adequate above. <http://jewsagainstzionism.com/events/20071203/index.cfm>

Third is a list of 14 Rabbis recommended in Europe that belong to this movement, or group that believes in the three oaths of exile. Again this is a list of the Rabbis, so it is natural to assume that the believers are more numerous than your stated 40. <http://jewsagainstzionism.com/about/visitorcomments/comment_details.cfm?ItemNo=1236>

This article gives a snapshot of previous attempts to list this group in wiki, the worlds Encyclopedia. The last is the surprised section. I was one of the surprised and am even more surprised that someone like CarolmooreDC is not familiar with this group. A group that has representatives in Jerusalem, 15 rabbis and perhaps more in Europe, and a gathering of 1500 in New York City. <http://jewsagainstzionism.com/about/visitorcomments/comment_details.cfm?ItemNo=1249>

I now understand why the Orthodox do not serve in the Army, I have never heard of three strong oaths, this is a key section that I think that Wiki needs to give an Orthodox perspective on. I feel very ignorant to have not know that it was not possible to be Jewish and not also a Zionist. How is this possible? How is it possible that CarolmoorDC,(I am guessing you are Jewish) have not heard of this group? Or did you and the rest of the world is ignorant? <http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/zionism/notjews.cfm>

I have a new found respect and love for Judaism that I did not think possible and would only like help in putting these thoughts out into the worlds encyclopedia. As side note I was kicked off of FB today when I joined the John Hagee Ministries fan site for the first time and left a respectful msg. I might expect to get this reaction from a Fundamentalist group but not from the Wiki community. Respectfully I end with a challenge for follow -- אמת -- Truth Even Unto Its Innermost Parts (note I am glad that their motto is not only in Hebrew:) Chris Connolly 21:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I did Not understand you were referring to a particular group among the many Jews who love the Torah. In fact I've run into them many times at various protests.

You are saying that someone tried to get the info in those links above into the Neturei Karta article and it was taken out? Unclear. Whatever the info, it is helpful if WP:RS have also covered that information, giving it WP:Notability for inclusion. Wikipedia also has its commandments :-)

My G-G-Grandmother was a Portguese Sephardic Jew who for reasons still unknown married a Catholic and family Catholic ever since, except me who quit in 1964 after a series of more transcendent experiences :-) . CarolMooreDC (talk) 21:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

thanks for the background, I hope to share my background in FB. I suspect that the FB block is temp, so long as I will never bring up this group again and not have their website on my profile page.

Again I would expect such thinking, or the refusal to consider another point of view from Fundamentalist Christians but not FB nor Wiki where Libitarian thought rules (except with this groups shuned status), all thought and knowledge should be out there. It in a question of why I refer to this particular group, rather it is a question of why Wiki does not refer to them. Reading more I have come to realize that secular Jews despise this group so it seems, and if you look at point four I make you will see what I mean and therefore marginalize them as ultra-Orthodox. Please give me some comments on the links. respectivllyChris Connolly 08:11, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Answering at end of thread and not in the middle -- it's true I was thinking of the group as being the 40 odd guys who I've seen show up at at least one event. I'm sure they have a couple hundred others who didn't show.

I don't know what FB is. Oneida community article could use better refs. Busy with other articles right now. CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Carol Moore of DC, FB is Facebook - I have a friend request to youChris Connolly 06:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Yisroel Dovid Weiss in 2005.JPG

File:Yisroel Dovid Weiss in 2005.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Yisroel Dovid Weiss in 2005.JPG. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Yisroel Dovid Weiss in 2005.JPG]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Your comments on JayJg's page

I would strongly urge you to recuse your comments on Jay's page. If you wish to violate wikipedia policies and start playing the "partisan" card, please note that the complaint was brought by those who may be perceived to have an axe to grind against JayJg, and their numbers at WP:AE were about equal to others. The reason the discussion was closed was that there was no violation. Comments such as yours only go to further the divide between editors attempting to collaborate on articles in the sphere of the Israeli-Palestinian discussion, and for someone who is member of WP:IPCOLL to act in a way antithetical to the project bodes ill for all of us. -- Avi (talk) 15:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, changed to something more constructive per User_talk:Sandstein#Premature_closure_of_AE_request.3F. CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Carol, in line with that, you've apparently followed me to the Unification Church and antisemitism article, and stated there that the article is "really part of ongoing attempt to use wikipedia for partisan purposes" Could you clarify exactly what you mean by that? Who is involved in this "ongoing attempt", and what are those "partisan purposes"? Alternatively, you might want to just strike those comments, since they violate Wikipedia policies. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:20, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You are correct. There are so many partisans against Unif. Church who would use that issue as the big stick to beat them with, it's counter productive to even begin that specific discussion. CarolMooreDC (talk) 23:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. The article was created by an ardent Unification Church supporter, and, from what I can tell, has mostly been edited by Unification Church supporters. I don't really know who, if anyone, is actually "partisan against" the Unification Church, much less using this fairly obscure topic "as the big stick to beat them with". Jayjg ^(talk) 02:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I just suggested merging Unification Church antisemitism controversy to American Jewish Committee, since that is the main subject of the article. Please comment on the AJC talk page, if you like. Steve Dufour (talk) 18:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

and delete

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unification Church antisemitism controversy (2nd nomination).Steve Dufour (talk) 18:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Carol_Moore_(2nd_nomination)

An article that you have created is currently up for deletion. Please take a moment to respond.Ikip (talk) 00:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't create it as I note there. CarolMooreDC (talk) 03:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Invitation

I see that many of your articles are up for deletion. I am sorry to see this. I am a member of a group of editors who helps build articles to become notable. I would be thrilled to see you become a member.

WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing Hello, Carolmooredc. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. Ikip (talk) 00:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for putting my article up there. I might watch page for the occasional article I do want to support, if it's not too busy.

But what other article is up for deletion? Unification one isn't mine, but I supported deletion since material belonged in main Unification article. CarolMooreDC (talk) 03:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey Ms Carol -2

I hope all is well just checking in to say hello and hope all is happiness. To give a smile today.LoveMonkey (talk) 14:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Still out of town but back tomorrow - will this hiatus cure my Wikiaddiction? Ho ho ho :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 11:24, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Well in the words of Chuck Berry "You know ya never can tell".LoveMonkey (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Revisionist historians

Your comments on Bush in Florida regarding revisionism is very interesting. I therefore wonder what you think of the distinction between the revisionists such as Gabriel Kolko, etc., and the Holocaust deniers. It seems to me that Bush took advantage of the distinction, and caused more confusion. I'd like to know more about your understanding of "revisionism." --Ludvikus (talk) 16:26, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

You'll have to give me a link to what I said since don't know and no time to look around. In general re: Holocaust there is a spectrum from real historians looking for facts, some of whom go about their business unharmed and others who get attacked and intimidated for straying just a tad from the "official line," all the way over to crazed bigoted haters of Jews (and probably others) who look for any reason to attack them. Teasing out who is what when they are close on the spectrum can be difficult and in interest of intellectual freedom more, rather than less, leeway should be the norm. CarolMooreDC (talk) 02:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Hello regarding your removal of contents on the ISM article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Solidarity_Movement&oldid=317962207 , I think the article you say is missing is here: http://www.ccmep.org/hotnews/will012402.html . Please amend as you feel appropriate. rkmlai (talk) 02:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)