User talk:Sam Francis

Old talk

---

On my talk page you said:

Welcome, Jizzbug. I've seen your edits on Anarchism -- some good work! However, I'm not sure about some of the external links: they are anarchist, but they're each one form of anarchism. Should they be put on the Libertarian socialism page? (Or whatever we're going to call that -- anarcho-communism, anarchist communism -- see Talk:Libertarian socialism.) Anyway, hope you settle in. It's good to have another person interested in anarchism here! -- Sam

And now I'm finally gettin' around to actually replying. *grin* I'd tend to think that any high quality site that promotes itself as being explicitly anarchist deserves a place in anarchism's external links section, be it anarcho-capitalist, anarcho-socialist, anarcho-anarchist, etc. That being said, maybe a few o' the links I put in there ought to be removed (off hand, the microradio.net link I put in isn't exactly explicitly anarchist [however, it does relate to the text because of its mention under "functioning anarchies"]). The best of the best ought be in anarchism's external links, then the less general, less awesome sites could be listed in their specific anarcho-whatever external links section. Heck, I dunno, I'm just sayin' shit. *grin* I just thought it'd for people to have a few links immediately, without havin' to surf through all the other sub-anarchism pages. --Jizzbug

---

Hello there Sam, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Thanks again, Mav :) It was getting lonely there, without anything on my talk page. --Sam

---

Hi Sam, I've moved your comments about the Noon novel from Vert to Vurt. -- The Anome 11:27 Dec 17, 2002 (UTC)

---

I see no reason to clutter recent changes up with major changes during an edit war. Vera Cruz

---

this is a minor change. it is of no interest to anybody but you. this is very minor. Perhaps there should be more than two degress of change. Vera Cruz

---

no?Vera Cruz

... Vera Cruz

---

Hi sam- just got your message- I havn't been looking in at wiki much for the last week or so, too much happening in real life plus been working on getting my vegan cookbook ready for printing (so it's been scanning, scanning, scanning- is scanning the most boring job in the world???)- what's happening with anarchy then? Had a quick look but havn't had time to look at the older versions- is there another edit war on? quercus robur 21:32 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)

---

Thanks for the welcome Sam. I know cold fusion, sql, and soon c#.

thanks again for the welcome

---

I wish to apoligize for marking everything as minor. As I would like to add some information on Salim I al Sabah, Kabbar, Abdul Aziz ibn Abdul Rahman ibn Saud, Najd, Faisal I, Political Titles of the Ottoman Empire, Warba, Abdulla II al Sabah, the First Kuwaiti Crisis, Abdullah ibn Hussein, Mashian, Failakah, Auhah, al Khalifa, al Jalahima, al Sabah, Abdul Karim Qasim, Jaber III al Ahmad al Sabah, Muhammad I al Sabah, the Second Kuwaiti Crisis, Zaki Arsuzi, Salah al Din Bitar, Ghazi ibn Faisal, Bakr Sidqi, Abdullah II al Sabah, Ahmad al Sabah, Abdul Ilah, and Percy Cox, as well as (obviously) the Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of October 1922, the Turkish Petroleum Company, the Basra-Baghdad Highway, the Berlin-Baghdad Railroad, and the Abudllah Khor Waterway, Nuri al Said, Abdulla III al Sabah, Aramco, the Kuwait Oil Company, and the Anglo-Kuwaiti Treaty of 1899; I would like to inquire as to what objections you might have to my doing so? Vera Cruz

---

Hello I notice you're edits to the Birmingham article. About the transport section, User: Pigsonthewing seems to have a strange obsession with putting sub-sections everywhere, even when their clearly not necessary. I've tried reasoning with him, but to no avail. Maybe you should try G-Man 17:29, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

User:Lir: please answer me this: which anarchists don't oppose government? --Sam 21:56, 26 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Comments left on article talk pages are not likely to be read or responded to by a specific recipient; try using my talk page... Most anarchists do not oppose government, as the wikipedia npov'ly defines it; this article, already clearly states that anarchists do not support "chaos or anomie" -- they support laws, rules, regulations, etc (with the possibile exception of "anarchi-capitalists")

Anarchists support a form of democracy known as "true democracy"; they oppose hierarchical and oppressive governments (such as republican/totalitarian governments); anarchists oppose the government, and all traditional notions of government; but, not all government. Lirath Q. Pynnor

---

Why is georgeorwell.de a "spam link"? It probably shouldn't be listed on the English wikipedia article on George Orwell anyway -- it should be on the German one -- but why call it spam? It seems a perfectley reasonable site at a glance. -- Sam

Hi, if it was only that page, i would agree with you. But this person has registered about ~40 domains (i've found so far) and offers on every single one some bits and pieces of information to an other topic. Who would do such a thing? Why not putting these pages on one single domani? Who pays for 40 domains and has no ulterior motive? The commercial links at the bottom of a lot of the pages were a determining factor for me to call them spam. In my view, someone wants to make profit with our google ranking or whatever. Sounds maybe a bit paranoid but - as i said before - i dislike the idea that someone wants to abuse the Wikipedia for their own personal profit. Regards -- fab 10:48, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)