User talk:Adbarnhart

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Adbarnhart, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you very much for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

By the way, did you know that you can use spaces and capital letters for your username? It's true! If you want, you can change your username to "A. D. Barnhart". It might be more pleasing to to the eye.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!—Nat Kraus e 13:06, 6 October 2005 (UTC), (Talk!)[reply]

Thanks much for the welcome. I am, indeed, enjoying things here thus far and am hoping to be at least a little useful from time to time.Adbarnhart 01:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolas Sarkozy[edit]

Just a remark: France not being a federal country, it has no notion of "federal government". What you probably meant was "national government". :-) David.Monniaux 08:25, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of course that's the case. I've been looking closely at Federalist #10 and #14 recently, which I'll conveniently use as my excuse :-) Adbarnhart 01:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Links, links, links...[edit]

Please try to contribute more with a text instead of generously putting links to the journal. At least the talk with Václav Klaus [1] lacks such basic information as when it was made so it is pretty worthless, IMHO. Pavel Vozenilek 17:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it's a fair criticism, though I actually disagree fairly strongly with your characterization. I'm pretty strongly on the inclusionist end of the spectrum and think things here tend to be source-poor and try to contribute thusly, though certainly within the context of WP:EL. It appears as though your sense of the appropriate criteria for inclusion is somewhat more constrained, which isn't unreasonable, but I'd respectfully disagree. Adbarnhart 18:01, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'l speak only about Klaus: he gave hundredths of interviews and wrote about a dozen of books. All his speaches are on website (some in English) as well as contents of at least 100 interviews. There are tons and tons of links and references that can be included and I somehow miss what makes Reason so special. Pavel Vozenilek 23:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, in that context, that there is anything particularly special about the interview to which I linked; it's of some use, I think -- not, in my opinion, worthless -- but it is entirely possible that a better set of external links and a selected bibliography (which should also be developed for the Klaus article) are out there and ought to be included. I come to it only as a generalist; I'd encourage you, since you seem to be familiar with what's out there on him, to better embed the article in source material, since I think the article suffers for its absence at the moment. Adbarnhart 07:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Central avenue[edit]

Hi! I also thought that there must be some other central avenues somewhere else. However, as I did not know exactly where, I myself did not set up a disamiguation page. Thanks for creating one.Central Avenue, Los Angeles, California was an interesting read, especially the comparison with 52nd Street. The central avenue of Kolkata does not have a similar vibrant history, though it is a quite important arterial road. Anyway, keep in touch! Bye !--Dwaipayanc 20:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there are several other Central Avenues that we ought to have on the disambiguation page, but, for now, we shouldn't have any "What links here" problems, anyhow. Cheers! Adbarnhart 16:54, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watts Prophets[edit]

Thank you for starting the article!--Rockero 15:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]