Hello, Maurice Carbonaro, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Michaelas10 (T|C) 14:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the article, but it appears more like a dictionary definition - compare with Neuralgia for a complete encyclopædia article. Perhaps you might consider expanding the article, or adding dictionary definitions to Wikipedia's sister project, Wiktionary. Regards, Tonywalton | Talk11:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Maurice - are you working on this page as a complete list of all world philosophies, both secular and religious? Or does it have some boundaries such as Eastern/Western etc... ? Regards, GourangaUK14:57, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear GourangaUK - The answer is yes. Because wikipedia is a global enciclopedia I think we owe it a global point of view, so I was thinking to a list of ALL world philosophies, both secular and religious, visualized in a a timetable that will give an idea of the advancement of world philosophy itself during time. Thanks if advance for any kind of contributions in thi sense.
Regards.
Maurice Carbonaro07:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Did you accidentally create this page in the main space of Wikipedia? I have tagged it for speedy deletion. Please try to be careful in creating new pages. If you're ever unsure about how to do something, just describe the problem and put {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will come along to give you advice. --dm(talk)08:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This could be an interesting article, but it's in need of sources to back up what you're saying. Could you add some? (websites, books, newspapers) If you contact me afterwards, I'll worry about the formatting. - Mgm|(talk)10:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Hypertinence, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
Thanks for uploading Image:Maurice carbonaro.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Just so you know, the Wikipedia manual of style suggests only to
make links that are relevant to the context. I have noticed that many of your recent contributions to Wikipedia are creating wikilinks to isolated words which are irrelevant to the context of the article. For example, at manifold, you linked point rather than to the correct point (geometry). It is important, when wikilinking, to consider not just if the word can be linked, but if it should be linked, and if so how. I would ask that in the future you please exercise more discretion in your choice of words to link. Regards, Silly rabbit (talk) 12:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Maurice, I would like to echo the above comment: please have a look at the manual of style and exercise some discretion. Most of the links you have been adding are not helpful. Sam Staton (talk) 11:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ciao Maurice, grazie per tue commenti alla mia pagina di discussione. I am not a philosopher and, frankly, I've had a bit of difficulty following your train of thought. One thing which occurred to me: as you know, our life consists of millions of small events that we hardly ever notice. Therefore, certain coincidences are bound to occur! For example, as the article on the Birthday paradox explains, a room full of people will likely have at least one pair who share the same birthday, even with as few as 30 persons. When I stand on a busy street corner, there will inevitably be people or cars passing by who would remind me of something or have interesting patterns in their license plate numbers. Having said that, I am at a loss for a comment concerning the political events in Italy or other things that you've mentioned. However, I'd like to caution you against inserting certain links just because they have personal meaning or significance to you: this is an encyclopaedia, thus we should strive to present information that is universally meaningful and valuable. I think that Silly Rabbit's note right above is self-explanatory. Cheers! Arcfrk (talk) 04:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maurice, thank you for your message on my talk page. I'm afraid I don't understand your comments about "meaningful coincidences". I don't understand what you mean by "meaningful coincidence". So I'm not sure I can help you there... Anyway, please do have a look at MOS:LINK. It's fine to reply here (on your talk page) as I will watch it. Sam Staton (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 08:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Buongiorno a te di nuovo, datosì che parli bene l'inglese come lingua madre, potresti dare una correzioncina alla voce? te ne sarei grato, ribacio le mani--Lodewijk Vadacchino (talk) 10:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
