User talk:TJFrazier

Editing notes to myself
updated (since my last visit)

User:TJFrazier/monobook.js

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 02:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Category help
Aaaack! Thank you for pointing that out, and for going ahead and fixing it. Off I go to read the manual! --Cantara 17:34, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Objectivism
Hi just wanted to make sure you see this :-) I have now posted a proposal for the project here, please feel free to take a look and add your name to the list. It appears that a minimum of 5 (preferably 10) users must express interest before the project can go ahead. Thanks. Matthew Humphreys 16:29, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Done.--TJ 16:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi TJ, thanks for your interest. Do you know of any other Objectivists on Wikipedia who might be interested? There aren't quite enough members yet to have a formal project page. --Matthew Humphreys 14:05, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You might try prospecting in Category:Objectivist Wikipedians. That isn't all of us, of course; I'm not there.  There are also quite a number of AR&O-related articles; their Talk pages, and Talk page histories, might prove useful.  If the articles are nicely linked in a Cat, then prospecting that might help; if they aren't linked, that's a project.  (I'd offer to help, but I'm a little backlogged at the moment, sorry.)--TJ 11:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion TJ. At the moment I have posted a note to the talk pages of a couple of relevant articles. If that doesn't work I'll contact individual members as you suggest. --Matthew Humphreys 22:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The project is now active at WikiProject Objectivism. I have added the user names of all those who expressed interest to the list of participants on the WikiProject page. I hope this is ok. --Matthew Humphreys 18:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Messing with other people's Talk text.
I said I'd update you when I ran into a clearer explanation of why you shouldn't interpolate your comments. Well, I found this bit at Arbitration_policy/Past_decisions
 * A user may not edit another user's comments except to make insubstantial changes (such as archiving/moving, formatting, or correcting typos) or with express permission from the other user.

Arguably, signed text that you insert can be distinguished from the other user's comments, but not easily, so it's best to avoid the whole issue entirely. Note that there's no problem fixing typos or formatting or whatever. In fact, a while back, I often fix the indentation of other users. Alienus 23:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. We are certainly agreed on the need for attributability and integrity.  [See also the cautions involved in refactoring].  Naturally, I will defer to your preferred style.
 * I do ask you to consider one special case: "laundry lists".
 * When Laz wrote one to you (top of O&h Talk), you replied seratim. As a reader, I personally found it difficult to maintain the intellectual continuity while jumping back and forth.  Take pity on your audience! :-) --TJ 11:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * As a pontifex (building bridges to consensus), I am unsure which technique leaves a better impression on the original party (and on third parties). This may or may not be worth discussing.--TJ 11:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * When you wrote one to me, I didn't have to reply at all. (Likely you could give an Objectivist POV on each point as well as I could! :-) In this case, where intellectual continuity is paramout, I would have very much wanted to interpolate.--TJ 11:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You can see my own, personal solution to your caveats, above: I have simply signed each point. Later interpolation, properly signed and indented, should cause no confusion.--TJ 11:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * [I am not arguing, here. I am preparing this fruitful discussion for a wider audience, in a guideline or some such. I cheerfully contemplate stealing all your good ideas for such (Really Big Grin :- ) .]--TJ 11:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Coercion
A wide-ranging discussion with User:Alienus on coercion, touching on self defense, Ayn Rand, Objectivist philosophy, ontology deontology (my confusion, sorry), libertarianism, capitalism, norming of the social contract, consequentialism, and a few irrelevancies, has been moved to

User talk:TJFrazier/coercion.

Others are of course welcome. BYO beer / espresso / Chinese food.--TJ 10:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Objectivism and homosexuality (just a wee thought)
I stumbled upon the aformentioned article and found the opening paragraph to be a bit shoddy. I'm in no way qualified to write significantly on the subjects of Objectivism, homosexuality, Ayn Rand, or any perceived conflict/relationship between the three, but I do know my prose, and those paltry two sentences are bad prose (and hilariously contrary, actually). I'm wondering if you could help me give the intro a facelift...I query you in particular because you apppear to be the level headed elder statesmen in the conflict on the talk page. I ask this merely as an attempted apolitical* with aesthetic sensibilities (I learned my lesson on the Communism page, so now I just try to make things make more sense).

Cheers,

Yossarian  09:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

PS: I made a briefer statement on the talk page, an tweaked the markup on the page proper.

PPS: *At least when it comes to Wikipedia editing

Atlas Shrugged Article
Hello! As a member of Wiki Project Objectivism would you please see my post on the excessive coverage of fictional technology, etc. in Atlas Shrugged and my proposal to replace it with more coverage of the meaning of the events in that novel. Thanks. —Blanchette (talk) 03:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Objectivism
I am clearing the participant list at WikiProject Objectivism due to inactivity. Please add yourself again if you want to participate. --Karbinski (talk) 22:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)