User talk:Eduen

Template:Hippies

Looks good, and I think I know exactly what color scheme you were trying to go for, but it doesn't quite come out on my end. The Barnes & Noble book store near me has a book in the graphic design section that contains the exact color codes for several "hippie" color schemes, and if you like, I can access them and try to add them to the template. What do you think? Viriditas (talk) 01:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and get a hold of it tomorrow if I have the time. They have at least three different types. Viriditas (talk) 01:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. I noticed a few edits on hippie. You can use your Sandbox for test edits before editing other articles. Thanks and have fun. ^Law_shoot! 01:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eduen. You have new messages at Viriditas's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Good show old sport

I saw what you're doing over at individualist anarchism You are the thing that we have needed for years and years and years. You might be interested in helping out finishing egoist anarchism, as it's been stagnating for months. Have you signed up to the anarchist task force yet? Zazaban (talk) 07:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The main issue is sources, there is a lot needed, and some of the stuff that's there may be biased, as most of it comes from a single guy. Also, there should be (a lot) more about communist egoism. Zazaban (talk) 07:45, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. Do you mind coming in and helping me incorporate it? I'm not really that great at large projects myself. Zazaban (talk) 08:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I have always felt that our coverage of individualist anarchism is crap. Basically, it is about market anarchism with some vague references to there also being other stuff. Let's say we work together with both articles? Zazaban (talk) 08:11, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also notice we both share an interest in the hippies. Nice. Zazaban (talk) 08:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have a lot of very good ideas. You're welcome to add some of that to the article if you want. Zazaban (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Zazaban. I enjoy what you have done with the individualist anarchism page as well. Thank you for your time. Libertad450 (talk) 22:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)Libertad450[reply]

User:Zazaban/Egoist anarchism

I really like what you have to offer, and I think you should incorporate some of the stuff into this article proposal. You seem very interested in the subject, and I think your contributions would be invaluable. Zazaban (talk) 22:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Music

I have removed the two user boxes that you posted to this page. The boxes themselves are fine, no problem there, but the way you posted them broke the page's template. The reason is that you posted the actual wiki-mark-up code onto the page, rather than posting it on a user page and then transcluding it to the page above, as all the other boxes have done on that page. Please do create your own usser page with that mark-up and then put in the transclusion templates on the page again. You can retieve your coding from the page history. If this is unclear or confusing, drop me a note and I can explain in more detail, or help you do it! - Ahunt (talk) 11:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Individualist anarchism

I don't have any more along those lines, but I agree totally. You should post that on the talk page. Zazaban (talk) 02:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Post left anarchy and post anarchism

Hey, do you agree that they should be in the article? Zazaban (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind re-adding it? I would, but I need other people's direct support. Zazaban (talk) 23:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, could you give me the link to where it says that post-left is individualist? That would be a great help. Zazaban (talk) 18:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As well as something for post-anarchism being individualist. Things are getting really nit-picky and hair-splitty, so we may need a few. Zazaban (talk) 19:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most anarcho-capitalists have absolutely nothing to do with the republican party. And please, stop accusing people of neoliberalism. It would probably be a much smoother affair if you stopped with the personal attacks and tirades. Zazaban (talk) 23:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may approve of my latest edits to the page. Zazaban (talk) 00:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, but it just inflames the discussion and makes it harder to get things done. Also, neoliberalism evolved after anarcho-capitalism, so even if they are similar, they are not the same thing. Zazaban (talk) 00:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't done anything for a few days, are you okay? Zazaban (talk) 16:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good work with the latest edits- And we're not being reverted. What should we do next? Can you find a source for post-anarchism being individualist? I found one for Post-left anarchy, but I couldn't find one for post-anarchism. I didn't have time to look very hard though. Zazaban (talk) 18:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution.

I suggest it's time to bring this to there. Nilho is the only person that is so aggressively opposed to any changes, and I looked over User_talk:Nihilo_01#Deletions_of_categories_in_the_Inclusive_Democracy_entry, and found out he's done this before. I suggest you post this at WP:Dispute resolution. Zazaban (talk) 20:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zazaban/Individualist anarchism

I've created User:Zazaban/Individualist anarchism for us, so that we can work on the article without getting reverted before we're finished. Then we can propose a final draft once everything is completed. Zazaban (talk) 02:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is mainly for you to edit, by the way- I don't really have enough time on my hands to work on whole sections like you do- the speed you work at is incredible- I'll probably just add a few sentences. Zazaban (talk) 03:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 12:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Anarchist naturism

A tag has been placed on Anarchist naturism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ridernyc (talk) 07:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchist naturism

Articles for deletion nomination of Anarchist naturism

I have nominated Anarchist naturism, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anarchist naturism. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Vision Thing -- 19:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Egoist anarchism

Hi, I don't know if you're still here, but I thought that you might be interested in the new article Egoist anarchism. It seems like your thing, and there's a lot of room for expansion. Zazaban (talk) 20:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back

Looking forward to working with you again :D! Zazaban (talk) 16:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, my articles Egoist anarchism and Contemporary anarchism have been finished since you were gone, and I'm also working on User:Zazaban/Anarchism and Chaos as well. Thought you might want to check them out. I thought Novatore might fit somewhere in Egoist, but I'm not sure. Zazaban (talk) 01:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lev Chernyi

I'm working on Lev Chernyi, and since you're much more well versed in this kind of thing than I am, you might be able to help. Zazaban (talk) 03:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further expansion of Individualist anarchism.

I'd say there's still plenty of room for expansion. Any ideas? Suppose you could try to creative the anarchist naturalism article again as well? Zazaban (talk) 07:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. When you blank out a large section without a reason, I am inclined to revert your edits. You may, of course, undo my edit but filling in an edit summary will help the project. Thanks A8 UDI 12:24, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Eduen. You have new messages at A8UDI's talk page.
Message added 23:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

A8 UDI 23:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche

This is a great idea for an article and a good start, well done! Skomorokh, barbarian 11:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche

I have nominated Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Soxwon (talk) 20:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche

		The Socratic Barnstar
		For an excellent job creating and expanding Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche. Them From Space 21:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I read through your article and found it extremely well-written and informative. Good work! Them From Space 21:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article you may be interested in

Sex-positive_movement#History. Started a history section, but it's very rickety right now. Zazaban (talk) 20:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche

Had already got to it. I don't think there was ever much chance of it being deleted anyway. Zazaban (talk) 20:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarcho-naturism

I would think it would be a good time to try creating that article again. I believe there is fair precedent now. Zazaban (talk) 20:33, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchy

Hey, I just wanted to explain, I didn't want you to think that I was for totally reverting your edits. From what it looked like I agree with a lot of them. However, could we take it a little slower? I think that others would like a little more input into such sweeping changes. Soxwon (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I ask

When you will learn... --Nihilo 01 (talk) 04:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism

Stop edit warring. There is no consensus for your proposed changes. It has been discussed and reverted enough times for you to get the point by this time. Please cease in this disruptive behavior. - 4twenty42o (talk) 22:31, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that your ideas have been rejected mean that you need to reach a consensus to make these changes. The lack of a consensus is not a freedom to edit war and push your own opinion. I am asking you to either discuss it or drop it. Please stop making such radical changes that change the over all tone of the article. There is a huge difference between being bold and edit warring. When you first introduced your material that was being bold. Being stubborn and refusing to accept that a majority of the editors to the article disagree are two totally different things. At this point it is disruptive and you have been asked to stop. - 4twenty42o (talk) 04:30, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nihilo 01, User:Knight of BAAWA and myself have asked you to stop making changes without a consensus. That means that we disagree for one reason or another. In my case I disagree because you are pushing changes without consensus, after several users have asked you to stop. You may very well be right. But this is not the way to prove it. Just a little FYI edit warring is vandalism in its own way. I choose to discuss it with you instead of reporting you because I respect your opinion, even though I disagree with you on several points. If you would care to discuss it in a civilized manner I would more than welcome your insights. But do not assume that because I disagree with you that I am on some sort of crusade. I have reverted your changes because I disagree with you. And you can bet you ass I would revert any of the above mentioned just as quickly if I felt that they were editing against consensus. - 4twenty42o (talk) 04:59, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK I am done trying to be reasonable with you. It is obvious to me that you are not editing from a neutral point of view and are choosing to edit war for the hell of it. I apologize for wasting both of our time with this. If you would like to make constructive changes, by all means, do so. If you continue to edit against consensus and edit war I will report you. I do not know which way that will go but I will do so anyway. I wish you the best of luck and I truly hope that some day you will join us. - 4twenty42o (talk) 05:15, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you question my integrity, then by all means, report me. I welcome the criticism of my peers at any time. I have no agenda and I have no more time for you. Cheers - 4twenty42o (talk) 05:40, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are aware of the thread about this scenario at ANI right?--The Shower Singer (talk) 05:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For your interest

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions#Egoists_.28individualist_anarchists.29 Zazaban (talk) 21:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism and sex/love

There ought to be something about Anarchism and BDSM. There's some sources over at WP:ATF in the workstation. Zazaban (talk) 20:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I just came by to thank you for writing this article.I found it very enjoyable and informative to read, and I hope you will continue writing such articles :) Skomorokh 00:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Influence and reception of Friedrich Nietzsche

December 2009

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. otherl left 12:31, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Individualism

I am rather looking forward to this. I've put the page on my watchlist. I've always been something of a dandy myself, and my favorite anarchists are Emma Goldman and Oscar Wilde. Also, Emma's quote about astristocratic anarchism is one of my favorites. Anarchy is a world where everyone is an aristocrat. Zazaban (talk) 17:39, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I've been thinking of changing the article on decadence so as to include mentions of positive usages of the word, I'll let you know how I do with that. Zazaban (talk) 17:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have managed to add sections on dandies, and on the decedent movement. The intro is still largely critical. Zazaban (talk) 18:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Come to think of it, free love the Counterculture of the 1960s, especially the Youth International Party and the Situationist International, and possibly the avant-garde should all probably have some mention in Individualism. Zazaban (talk) 07:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RABM

Hello there! I've proposed some corrections for your edits to Black metal article, take a look on it. Let's work together! Black Kronstadt (talk) 02:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed this one, left a comment on the talk page. Strange, I always thought there were quite a few anarchist black metal groups. Zazaban (talk) 19:40, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Decadence

I've been doing some work over at decadence, changed the highly negative tone and added sections on dandies and the decadent movement. Wondered if you would like to help. Perhaps some more recent examples, I can't think of anything. Perhaps rave culture. Zazaban (talk) 10:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was more interested in expanding the much neglected positive sense of the word, such as used by Oscar Wilde. I have added a section on rock music. Zazaban (talk) 10:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Dandies

Category:Dandies, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 07:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism GAN

Hi, As you may be aware, I'm assessing the anarchism article after it was nominated as a good article. A couple of the points I have identified are related to material you have added. Basically I think your additions are good, but GA status requires a bit more referencing. Also the CNT poster needs a new tag re its copyright status. Thanks.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche - GA ready?

Just looking over this article and wondering if you would be willing to push it through the GA process. I think it meets, if not exceeds, the standards. If it doesn't, the task force should be able to assist as a follow up to the recent Anarchism GA listing. --Cast (talk) 01:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchism and Direct Action

Hi, i'd just like to know your reason for putting an Anarchism sidebar on the direct action page please. As although Anarchists may use direct action direct action doesn't neccessarily mean anarchy?? thanks --Allie Cabab (talk) 19:45, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Individualist anarchist legacy

Agreed Zazaban (talk) 20:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

5 cents-worth of free advice

Not throwing your bizarre belief that anarchocapitalism isn't a form of anarchism into every single discussion would certainly help you be taken more seriously. Honestly, putting "anarcho" in quotes like that? Makes you look childish. But feel free to continue your rage against anyone who has a penny more than you do. Just please know that talk page discussions are not the place to air your hate for anyone who has a penny more than you do; they are for discussing the article. - Knight of BAAWA (talk) 03:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History of anarchism

Since you are very good at it, I was wondering if you'd be interested in helping with this article. I tried to fix it awhile back, but I could only do so much. I managed to sort it into something chronological, and fixed a lot of grammar. It's currently quite terrible and sparse still. You are better than Santa Claus when it comes to improving articles. :D I don't mean to lean on you, of course, but I thought I should point it out. Zazaban (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thoreau and anarchism

Some time back, you created a subsection in the Thoreau article about his influence on anarchism. This subsection should be expanded with better sources. Specifically, there is a quote in the first paragraph for which I can find no reference. It is possible that subsequent edits have removed the reference, though I cannot find the change in the history. Can you take a look at it and tell me if you recall where that quote came from. The Emma Goldman quote needs a ref. as well, if you know the source. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Anarchism and sex/love

Category:Anarchism and sex/love, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Template:Anarchism sidebar. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. http://infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionA1#seca13

"A.1.3 Why is anarchism also called libertarian socialism?" Lenerd (talk) 23:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

council communism, left communism, freudo-marxism and autonomism are also libertarian socialist currents but all of them happen to be marxist currents. this is why libertarian socialism cannot be said to be an anarchist "school".--Eduen (talk) 01:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian socialism

I disagree that being influenced by Marx means it can't be anarchist. It is the "Anarchism sidebar" not the "Bakuninist sidebar." I would be hard pressed to find one who can reconcile libertarian socialism with dictatorship of the proletariat. Lenerd (talk) 01:47, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Synthesis anarchism

A tag has been placed on Synthesis anarchism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Shadowjams (talk) 09:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anarcho-communism

The addition you made to the article is very fascinating and useful, well done. On another note, why is Isaac Asimov the picture next to the sceptic userbox? Is he famous for being a sceptic? Best wishes, ValenShephard (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discussion

You were mentioned in passing at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Discussion_of_Scope_at_Talk:Libertarianism and may wish to attend to it. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar Wilde - why I removed the politics section (again)

Hi Eduen,

I noticed your of edits re-adding a politics section to the Wilde article, I've reverted them, but since you've clearly a strong interest in this topic you deserve an explanation why. Firstly, a section such as this did exist before and it was merged into the article further up: Oscar Wilde#Essays and dialogues contains an account and analysis of Wilde's writing in that form. Thus Soul of Man is given space relative to its consideration in biographical and critical sources on Wilde, and with WP:SS.

Secondly, a separate section for one aspect of his writing breaks with the structure of the article, which weaves biography and criticism and accounts for works chronologically. Why should "politics" have a separate section as opposed to sexuality, nationality or sporting views? Have a look at the essay by Geoffrey Wheatcroft, "Not Green, Not Red, Not Pink" (The Atlantic Monthly, May 2003) which cautions against allowing Wilde to be adopted as an icon by various causes.

Thirdly, the information you've added contains only one reliable source, and that paragraph was copied from the Soul of Man article. That article is a better place for full discussion of the philosophical themes in Wilde's essay. (For example see this complaint by the GA reviewer)

I've been thinking about working on an article on one of Wilde's works now that the main article is essentially full - at 10,000 words it needs polishing in a hundred small ways rather than expansion with new material. The Soul of Man under Socialism is one of my favourite Wildean works, let me know if you're interested in working on it seriously, up to GA or FA level.

Best wishes, --Ktlynch (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Generally one responds where the discussion started

Hello, Eduen. You have new messages at Ktlynch's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Anarchism

One of your edits has an unknown reference. Would you mind fixing this if possible? Thanks. –CWenger (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eduen. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Templates

Hello, just letting you know that there's no need to write the word "Template:" when calling a template. Just call it like this: {{template name}}. Graham87 14:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your editorial work in the constellation of articles surrounding anarchism. Thank you. You make the encyclopaedia better. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Émile Armand

Hello Eduen. I was wondering if you know where did Armand publish his Petit Manuel Anarchiste Individualiste. Please answer in my talk page at my home wiki. Best regards, --Georgez (talk) 20:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]