User talk:BoredextraWorkvidid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Hello, BoredextraWorkvidid! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking Insert-signature.png if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Millahnna (mouse)talk 06:43, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles

(Jean KemperN (talk) 11:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)) ( (talk) 11:02, 1 October 2010 (UTC)) Dear Sir, I did appreciate the following text of yours. My name is Jean-François Monteil and for wikipedia I am Jean KemperN. I suggest you should contact me. I have taught general linguistics in Bordeaux for 35 years. Two fields closely linked: 1 necessity of replacing the Aritotelian square by the logical hexagon 2 Arab handing down of Aristotle. Last year, I created a personal site that meets with a certain success: or Tract Eight-8. Recently, I have begun to use the knol system organized by Google. To find my knols, I advise you to type grammar-and-logic a collection by Cestas. Some administrators expelled contributions of mine. If you want to know the story, type on Google Jean KemperN. In the page Dossiers of Tract Eight-8, you'll find the contributions deleted under the numbers 17--27. Please find my email adress: ( (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC))31 December 2010 (UTC)) (Jean KemperNN (talk) 02:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)) (Jean KemperNN (talk) 02:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC))(cf. here)

[edit] I really don't want to get further into another topic but seriously, "Particular statements are subcontraries. 'Some man is just' and 'some man is not just' cannot be false together" This is just terrible English. I cannot suppose this is how Aristotle would have worded his beliefs, because if so my opinion of him is going to rapidly drop. I completely appreciate that not everybody in the world is a native English speaker, and/or numerous other reasons for explaining the use of man rather than men and so on (such as the forming of sub contraries into one word is 'wrong'), but it seems to me to further highlight a problem Wikipedia is displaying. It is losing relevance through poor maintenance, cross referencing etc.. Especially on articles of such GREAT importance as these on concepts/methods of thinking which are so valuable to our future being a positive one! BoredextraWorkvidid (talk) 10:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)