Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:49, 7 July 2005

Please refrain from personal attacks in edit summaries. For instance you wrote, in , "-POV, buffoon!". Please restrict your comments in the edit summary to a description of what you have modified in the article. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:14, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think you need to seriously consider your current behavior. Posting bogus claims of vandalism ( Vandalism in progress) because some other editors dislike your edits, or find them idiosyncratic, is a real breach of etiquette. You might find it more profitable, and possibly get someone to agree with you if you actually engaged in a dialog rather than throwing around spurious vandalism claims. Saswann 12:00, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

BTW, new entries on that page go at the top Saswann 12:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You've recently made edits to Libertarianism that have been challenged and reverted, and the request has been made that you present evidence for your assertion. Please provide the references instead of just re-introducing your changes without comment, quacks and walks like vandalism otherwise. Chairboy 17:16, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Three revert rule

While you're looking up the axioms and ideologies, best keep in mind the Misplaced Pages:Three revert rule. Rhobite 06:59, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Libertarianism x 2

I've found more than half a dozen sources, Alfrem. You've found zero. Just to review, they are:

1. A professor teaching about different political philosophies including libertarianism
2. about.com
3. A libertarian web publication
4. The Los Angeles Times
5. another encyclopedia
6. a think tank
7. a book that describes the ideas of a libertarian philosopher on democracy, law, and constitutions (if that's not political philosophy, I don't know what is)

Additionally, I now submit the following sources, mostly professors:

1. Robert Nozick was a "libertarian political philosopher (according to a senior fellow of the liberal Brookings Institution, and also according to a University of California Philosophy Professor that clearly knows more about this than either of us)
2. Hans-Hermann Hoppe was a libertarian political philosopher as well (according to a distinguished economics professor)
3. "libertarian political philosophy... presents a powerful case for natural rights and private justice," according to another professor.

That's eleven sources to your zero. Please don't make your changes again without a pretense of finding sources. I've already informed you about Misplaced Pages's policies on disrupting Misplaced Pages to make a point and on original research. If this continues, I'll seek action from administrators.

Dave (talk) 17:20, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Number 1. is speacking from "small government" and "Libertarian Party". You can't expect that I check this nonsense all again. I need only one reasoned evidience, when you have one. So which is one? --Alfrem 17:34, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't know which "number one" you're talking about, but they should all be sufficient. If you consider the fact that a libertarian philosopher wrote about constitutions to be "good enough", then #7 is the best. If you consider newspapers to be good enough, then #5 would work (it's an article from the Los Angeles Times reprinted word-for-word on another site). If you think that professors and think tank experts are authoritative, then any of the new sources (the second group of sources) should be good enough. Regardless, due to the policy on Original Research, any one of those sources should be enough unless you provide one of your own. Dave (talk) 18:32, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

The nunber 7 is a liberal philosophy of classic liberalist Hayek. Your are not able to differ between libertarian and liberal. I don't will have longer time for you. bye. --Alfrem 19:02, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As I already told you, Hayek's "liberalism" is the same as libertarianism in the United States. I even gave you a link. Here's a quote: "In the United States, where it has become almost impossible to use "liberal" in the sense in which I have used it, the term 'libertarian' has been used instead." Since you obviously don't pay attention to the sources I provide, I won't burden you with any more. but if you continue to disrupt the Libertarianism article, I will report you for that and for original research. Dave (talk) 19:12, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

You are so silly! Hayek couldn't use his term "liberal" in America and used "libertarian" for "liberal" instead. And you mean that liberal would be the same. --Alfrem 19:41, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Libertarianism

I would prefer not to have to file an RFC on your behaviour. Please stop reverting Libertarianism to remove footnotes and the wikilink to political philosophy, You have so far not given us any compelling reason why it is not a political philosophy, and quite a few people are asking you to stop reverting that page. If you continue this behaviour, you risk being seen as deliberately disrupting Misplaced Pages. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:44, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, you must give the evidience. Your POV! You make the same politcal nonsense against me. 1:"a few people" --Alfrem 00:11, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User conduct RFC

Due to your constant reversion of Libertarianism and your unwillingness to provide evidence to back up your POV, I have placed evidence of your conduct on RFC. I have done this so that the community may review what has happened and to comment on what they see is happening. The Misplaced Pages community will be given a chance to make comment and suggestions as to whether you have been fair and reasonable, or whether you have been unfair, disruptive and displayed a willingnes to push your POV at the expense of all other points of view. I would recommend that you provide a response in the relevant section of this RFC. - Ta bu shi da yu 29 June 2005 01:34 (UTC)

Anarcho-Capitalism

I am asking you nicely to refrain from deleting content from the anarcho-capitalism article until you collect refrences that explain what it is you're doing. If for no other reason than the fact that you cannot explain it yourself to anyone's satisfaction.Saswann 30 June 2005 13:29 (UTC)

David Friedman

You changed the David Friedman article to suggest that he was an anarchist rather than a libertarian. This is not true, please stop messing with articles about Libertarianism. Edward 2005-06-30 18:36:10 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee request filed

I have filed an ArbCom request because of your behaviour on Libertarianism. I have tried to reason with you numerous times, to no avail. Please respond on the page Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#User:Alfrem. - Ta bu shi da yu 7 July 2005 08:49 (UTC)