User talk:Oilstone

Welcome

Welcome!

So Much for Being bold and fearless.

Concerning whole and parts

Hello, I'm Mysterytrey. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Machine Elf 1735 that didn't seem very civil, so I removed it. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it’s one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Mysterytrey 16:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"halving all parts in order to double their number proves nothing", Elf 1735 isn't exactly considerate or civil either. But I will let him have the final say in the matter. I'm not a passionless Stoic. Oilstone (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any line segment can be divided continuously ad infinitum. At all times, with each division, the length of each part shortens by a half, while at the same time, the number of parts multiplies by two. So, how can an infinite number of parts, no matter how small they are, make up a finite whole? Because for every division, not just some but all, the lengths of the parts are reducing as fast as the number of parts are increasing. This means that even as the number of divisions tends to infinity, the corresponding halving of each part keeps the original line segment's length intact. Oilstone (talk) 01:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The primary objective of Wikipedia?

From, Mysterytrey "Wikipedia exists for the people who read it, not for the people who edit it. Every edit should either improve the factual accuracy of Wikipedia or make it easier and more useful for the reader. Any edit which does not serve these goals is a waste of time and energy, and quite possibly counterproductive." -adapted from Beyond My Ken.

It is not true that wikipedia exists only for the readers, editors have a role to play too. Should Wikipedia become nothing but a bunch of quotations cut and pasted here and there? Besides, I am unable to think of any encyclopedia that is free from original research. Furthermore, who made you guys the Wikipedia police? Oilstone (talk) 01:18, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is Zeno of Elea wrong?

Of course Zeno just questioned how can an arrow move if at one moment it is here and motionless and at a later moment be somewhere else and motionless, like a motion picture film. (Aristotle, Physics VI:9

August 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to Talk:Outlines of Pyrrhonism, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 19:57, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Outlines of Pyrrhonism

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Outlines of Pyrrhonism 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 the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Tgeairn (talk) 20:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Outlines of Pyrrhonism. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 20:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to Outlines of Pyrrhonism. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User:Jeff G.. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 20:19, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 20:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]