User talk:Eunous

External Link
The trailing slash on the URL ("summary.html/") makes it look for a directory called "summary.html" and then the index file for that directory: the URL should be simply http://www.platon-lysis.de/Summary.html (no slash). Looks like an interesting site. I wonder if it is a promotion for a book, however. RJC Talk Contribs 13:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I thank you for useful advice. You will see my Summary is of academic interest. And it is of course present in English and American libraries. But unfortunataly there is often a barrier of language which I hope to diminish by the Summary. Eunous 6. August 20.57


 * Again, the summary seems interesting. Is it a promotion of your book, however?  Wikipedia's policy on external links frowns upon promotional or advertising material.  RJC Talk Contribs 19:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry to say that I have some competence with respect to Plato' Lysis. How to overcome national borders in science? Must the English wikipedia article of Lysis be confined to English speakers? How can academic progress have a reflex in Wikipedia? A bibligraphie of Translations in Wikipedia is unwillingly a promotion. – If I would write a complete new article about Lysis in English Wikipedia you perhaps would delete it. The present article is plain, but suggests that Platon has given a Greek commonplace in his complex dialogue. But if one has a suspicion of primary economic interests one has a difficulty to see a primary scientific or academic interest. I hope for a fair discussion. Eunous


 * I don't doubt your competence regarding the Lysis. And while overcoming national borders in science is a worthwhile project, the answer to the question of how to overcome these borders is — "not Wikipedia."  The summary you provide is an advertisement for your book:  it does not itself constitute an analysis of the text; while I'm sure that your book was peer-reviewed, the promotional material for it was not.  I think the relevant guidelines here are WP:External links and WP:Conflict of interest.  RJC Talk Contribs 21:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * One can write a plain article about academic topics with commonsense or with knowledge of the communis opionio of the academic society. When he does not cite his sources in order not to promote any book it seems to be no problem in Wikipedia. But if one writes a short article with unorthodox theses against the communis opinio, he has to refer  to a solid argument in an academic publication – dignified in an academic series, if possible. Most complex arguments cannot have place in an encyclopedia like Wikipedia. Therefore a reference to a publication with bibliographic information is unavoidable. I cite Wikipedia: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source.- In such a case a suspicion of promotion is not justified. I hoped that Wikipedia will not be fixed on traditional thoughts of the communis opinio, but will be open for academic progress. But now I see my hope was in vain. One might have quite another suspicion. Preserve your commonplace-article about Lysis. Eunous

Latest edit
I am glad that you have not abandoned the project of improving Lysis (dialogue). I hope you continue to do so. Much of your most recent addition does not conform to several core principles of Wikipedia, found in WP:Policies and guidelines. I understand that you have published your interpretation of the Lysis, and that you are (understandably) unsatisfied with other published interpretations, but an article that argues for your reading does not preserve a neutral point of view.

I am going to add a Welcome template to the top of this page with a number of helpful links for getting started. I hope you continue to work on this and other articles. RJC Talk Contribs 16:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello, RJC. Not surprised I will come back after a necessary pause. EunousEunous (talk) 10:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)