User talk:Thewolf37

Welcome!

Hello, Thewolf37, 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 ask your question there. Again, welcome! Red Director 19:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issue with Stephen D. Mumford

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Stephen D. Mumford, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.population-security.org/31-BIO.html. As a copyright violation, Stephen D. Mumford appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Stephen D. Mumford has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Stephen D. Mumford and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Stephen D. Mumford with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Stephen D. Mumford.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 21:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing me to the copyright issue - I rewrote the article and included a link to more detailed biographical info in the reference section. --Thewolf37 19:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gunnar Heinsohn article

Hello! I've noticed that you have been one of latest contributors to the Heinsohn entry and i think it still needs some overhaul/extension, in particular there is no mentioning of the controversial nature of his research. Personally i'd suggest maybe just adding a criticism paragraph, the german wikipedia article on Heinsohn might provide a good guideline. Anyhow I didn`t want to start making modifications without your input first,therefore i've just tagged the article for now. Please let me know what you think.--Kmhkmh 16:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I got your note - I'd suggest to leave the article tagged for now until you`ve got a chance to rewrite. Unfortunately i have no English sources regarding Heinsohn, but as i mentiod the german entry and also its discussion page there have quite some sources (such as quotes by other scholars about Heihnsohn) and summaries available. regards--Kmhkmh 03:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I checked the discussion page of the german wikipedia article on G. Heinsohn. To me, it seems to be a lot of hot air produced by people who know next to nothing about the work they discuss (no matter if they opt pro or contra Heinsohn). I always love it when the discussion page of an article is much longer than the article itself. That could suggest that even the disputants themselves feel incompetent to make contributions to the article based on knowledge about the matters discussed - they still seem to feel capable enough to initiate editwars based on things like deletions rather than contributions, though. Do we really need this on wikipedia?

I did include the references to rejections of Heinsohn´s interpretation of the witch-hunts I found on that page into the article (see footnotes . You will notice that the article consists mainly of references. My purpose in writing the article was to start to make references to work by and about Heinsohn available on wikipedia because his "youth bulge" theory and his interpretation of european demography has recently received some attention on the web, usually being discussed alongside with points of view put forward by Mark Steyn ("America Alone") and Walter Laqueur ("The Last Days of Europe"). No qualms about the fact that Heinsohn´s views are quite controversial and off the mainstream of social sciences. No wonder, Heinsohn tends to pick topics that are intensely value-laden, emotionally charged and surrounded by prejudice and often conflicting interests (interest, money, birth control and demography, sacrifice, genocide). So I agree with you that the best bet for the wikipedia article would be to include references to any rejections, refutations, criticisms of Heinsohn´s points of views that are available, which I have tried to do to the best of my ability. As far as keeping the article tagged or not - I basically don´t care if it´s tagged or not, and I will rewrite it in more detail as soon as I have time. --Thewolf37 16:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments posted yesterday by mistake on Kmhkmh Talk concerning the revision of the Heinsohn article. Like so many others before him, such as Velikovsky, Reich, and Fomenko, he has allowed himself to be seduced by the perceived beauty of his own fantasy and become immune to criticism. Despite the protestations of the anonymous editor in Romania (89.122.../86.106...), the fact of the matter is that most of Heinsohn's support and criticism comes from Velikovskians. Phaedrus7 19:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see, you are correct that Heinsohn´s chronological work has not received any support from historians and that even in circles of Velikovskyan and other chronological revisionists, responses have been mixed and there has not been much agreement. I also agree that these responses should be included in the article, and I explicitly included that while his work is being discussed in velikovskyan circles, it is being rejected my mainstream historians. This was with the intention of presenting an accurate picture of the reception of Heinsohn´s work. I appreciate the additional references to the discussion of Heinsohn´s ideas and to the fact that he never answered to these criticisms. I have no basis for judging Heinsohn´s chronological claims since I am not a historian. Thus, I have no basis to judge if your interpretation that he "has allowed himself to be seduced by the perceived beauty of his own fantasy" has anything to do with Heinsohn´s argument. If you choose to believe so, so be it. I, for one, prefer specific counterarguments to such general statements of belief, which only serve to deteriorate the quality of content-based discussion. --Thewolf37 (talk) 23:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for your question "why does the English version not mention the biographical details mentioned in the German version, such as Gunnar's father's service in the Kriegsmarine?", I did not include that information because I could not verify a reliable source for it. If you want that information in there, just verify it and add it to the article, referencing a reliable source. --Thewolf37 (talk) 00:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quantitative Easing

Anything to add? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.216.129.29 (talk) 20:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Birth control

Hi there, good contribution to the Birth control article. Can you format your refs, please. see Wikipedia:Citation templates. Most of the sources in the article are formatted.

Also, can you add a citation to your contribution in the public policy section? Ta--SasiSasi (talk) 21:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Private property and the Right to property

Re your comment on the private property talk page, you might be interested in the right to property article I have been working on.--SasiSasi (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quantitative easing discussion

There is a discussion going on at Talk:Quantitative easing on a topic you have discussed before. You are invited to participate. Lagrange613 (talk) 05:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Thewolf37. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Thewolf37. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Thewolf37. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]