User talk:GabrielAPetrie

Talk Pages on the account of Gabriel Arthur Petrie.

John Zerzan
-Hi Gabriel, why must the "Criticism" section for the article contain more on rebuttals to the criticisms rather than the criticisms themselves? The rest of the article already explains his beliefs at length. Also you wrote its possible that "no suitable wilderness areas can be found to reside in". You can't possibly really believe that right? --Jleon 14:14, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Since I made some of the "rebuttals" I thought that I should answer: I would say that the criticism against his use of technology in combination with his critique of technology is unfair since it's creating a straw man. His critique of technology is simply not really about what is implied the article, i.e. the individual use of technology, but rather of technology as an institution in society. And no; although much of his thought are explained in the article, his view on technology is only mentioned among the criticism. 81.216.226.49 14:35, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi Jleon. I don't find that the subparagraph I added amounted to a rebuttle or really a criticism, but simply a matter-of-fact statement as to the possibility of why a person, even a person who seeks to live in the woods, might find it hard or impossible to do so. I myself often try to live in the woods for as long as I can, and otherwise find myself living in homeless shelters. I basically move into the woods and when I run out of food stamps for the month or when I get too nervous around the bandits and such I meet out there, I take off back to the city and try to scope out another site. Granted, Zerzan lives out in the northwest where there is a great deal more wilderness than here in central Michigan where I live, but the problem of disspearing wilderness being more and more inhabited by encroaching city elements is true everywhere. The wildernesses in Montana are now almost exclusively inhabited by fugitives with a few 'hippies' strewn about them probably unawares of the nature of the people they are sharing woodspace with. So, as far as 'beliefs' are concerned, moreover I know that what I wrote was true to an extent; to the extent that what is 'suitable' is still entirely up to and defined by the person whose life is in question, meaning that a person defines for their own self -- autonomously -- what is 'suitable' for them, or not. Zerzan might only find a particular stretch of land with a particular expected population level 'suitable', agreed? And that 'suitable' wildspace might not be available, agreed? GabrielAPetrie 14:29, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * But are you sure that bandits in the woods are among the speculations why Zerzan himself doesn't re-wild, as your statement implies, given it's context? What you say might be true, but I've never heard anything about that being a reason for Zerzan. Also, that is certainly not true for every geographical area; here in Sweden, where I live, and especially in the north, there are places where you could find yourself atleast 200 km to the nearest settlement, road or power-line. 81.216.226.49 14:35, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Great point, but in a purely speculative paragraph, purely speculating on a subject that is, apparently, pure speculation, I think it's safe to speculate, especially based partially on real information about other things. I am, of course, not against the paragraph containing the words 'incompetence' -- that's really the first thing to come to mind myself when I wonder why he isn't living out in the woods. Maybe he just can't hack it. But, I just wanted to include the (also speculative) possibility that it might be, if not today then perhaps tomorrow (or maybe yesterday but we just aren't aware of it, yet,) due to the lack of 'suitable' woodspace to live in. And as far as what we've heard, I don't think anybody but Zerzan really knows the 'why' of it, but I am enjoying all the speculation and I think all of it really adds to the article. It definitely falls under criticism and "Criticism". As far as why not move to Sweden, I can't say, but I can speculate???? GabrielAPetrie 14:40, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

--But both of you are talking about wilderness areas within westernized countries. Even in these places, you will still inadvertently receive many benefits of the surrounding industrial society. It seems to me that John Zerzan should consider places in the world that exsist wholly removed from these luxuries. I mean why doesn't he live in a true hunter-gatherer society if that is what is really ideal? --Jleon 14:43, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I can asure you of that it's not as simple as it may sound to move away from everyone you know (or at least most of them, as you may bring a few friends or family members with you), to a foreign place with a completely alien geography and culture (like if you move in with the !Kung for example). Also, such an endeavour would require extensive capital, which I'm afraid Z doesn't have to his disposal, given his income (~0). I think that if there are to be any "future primitives," be that Zerzan, me, you, gabriel or whoever, those people's societies has to be formed by the neo-primitives themselves, possibly with inspiration from existing (or formelry existing) primitive hunter gatherer cultures (mainly the means of subsistence). You can't cimply hijack another culture, like the american indians or whatever and think that you will fit in, especially not after 60 years (like Z, although I think 20 years, like me, is hard enough) of civilized life. You have to do it with people that's in the same boat as you. Besides, it might be the case that Z want to fight civilization and not simple flee from it. Maybe the constant threat from the surrounding industrial expansion never would give him the peaceful existance he is searching, and he would end up like the unabomber. Also, if you live 200 kms from the nearest settlement, you won't benefit from the industrial society. There are, however, other problems, like the restrictions on fishing and hunting here in sweden and other shit. You'd have to become a criminal in order to subsist. 81.216.226.49 15:06, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Also, while living in the woods, you often face situations that are in microcosm the same as situations faced throughout agriculturally industrialized society. For example, most of the people (with two exceptions, one a retired veteran and the other a new friend,) in the woods I stayed at most recently had no inclination to preserve or to share the wildspace we had available. In a few weeks' time, there were probably half a dozen axe-felled saplings (for firewood,) despite the presence in the periphery of the woods of several large piles of deadfall that could have made sufficient fire for us all over the next two or three years, especially counting in the deadfall yet to be produced by the colder seasons. And, too, there was a trend of making fires for light (not a fan of that) and to 'keep away bugs' (keeping the excitement and agitation level toned down helps enough, no need for building fire against 'bugs') and when done for cooking (my favorite purpose), it was still overdone and overcostly in terms of wood. That's just the tip of the iceburg. I don't doubt that Zerzan can muster the competance and strength to live without overusing or misusing resources (building a permanent home such as a wigwam, lodge, or house is a no-no, unsustainable and unhealthy,) but there are still all of the other problems which come from the encroaching agriculturally industrialized civilization. Eventually, you lose your primitive resources and society to the takeover caused by agriculture. It must seem like a worthwhile trade-off for Zerzan to not go primitive right now but to use civilization's technological amenities for the purpose of warning them against the wrongs they are doing to the planet that could otherwise sustain a good number of them. I don't have any more time to discuss right now, I will be back later. GabrielAPetrie 15:37, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I think he should write an essay about why he hasn't met the highest possible ideal. I agree, what gives? GabrielAPetrie 14:45, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Granholm and Mulhern
Hello,

Two things, first, it is common practice on Wikipedia for articles on people to be at the name by which they are most commonly known, rather than their full name.


 * That's a sad replacement for things being done fully and properly, but ok.

Second, if there does happen to be a good reason to move an article to a different name, please use the "move" funtion at the top of each page rather than cutting and pasting the contents. Cut and paste moves obscure the article's edit history, which is a very important aspect of the GFDL. Cheers. older&ne;wiser 23:23, July 29, 2005 (UTC)


 * Regarding your comments on my talk page. Although there has been much discussion about it, there is a fairly strong support for using the most common name to title an article -- it is not just my whim. As for licensing your wiki contributions, I'm not sure what you mean. At the bottom of every edit page is a notice that "All contributions to any page on Wikipedia are released under the GNU Free Documentation License". So your contributions already are licensed under GFDL. Some people release their contributions under additional licences, such as Creative Commons, but that is an individual decision. Bkonrad (posting anonymously from work while on hold)


 * Well, I personally don't actually have any "suitable use" for the CC-SA license. User:Ram-Man asked if I would (I guess because I have made a lot of contributions to articles on places, which he has also contributed heavily to via his bot, Rambot. I didn't see any reason not to do so, and so I did). He has an FAQ about multi-licensing that you might find helpful.  Regarding "proper" names, I guess we'll just have to disagree. I think it makes Wikipedia easier to use and less intimidating to edit. Personally, I'd hate to see it degrade into some sort of ho-hum grind. And I don't think that means it can' also have a high quality of reliability and verifiability as well as being accessible. older&ne;wiser 22:22, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology
Since you are interested in flags and emblems I would like to inform you that the WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology has just been created. Why not take a look? I hope you can join. Inge 19:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Eugene
Hey. Thanks for adding the information under "anarchism" to the Eugene page. Unfortunately none of the information you added was sourced, and so it was removed. If you can cite sources for the information you'd like to add, please do so. Thanks pinotgris  00:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Minger (slang)
A tag has been placed on Minger (slang), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you.  TN ‑ X - Man  12:55, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Minger (slang)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Minger (slang), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.  TN ‑ X - Man  13:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi!
Just to tell you that I did not agree with your moving Apraxia and I tried to fix it in the way I thought it should be, but it didn't work out, and now I wrote about it at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. (But I don't mean I have a conflict with you, I just tried to move things around and it became a bit of a mess...) Friendly regards,  Lova Falk     talk   19:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * PS They fixed it. Cheers!  Lova Falk     talk   19:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Apraxia (sound-art)
A tag has been placed on Apraxia (sound-art) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Beeshoney (talk) 15:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Brent Spiner
Please refrain from making non-constructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Brent Spiner. This edit constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)