User talk:Tommcnabb

Syagrius and Trier
Tom, you wrote: "The entire northern half of Roman Gaul, from Tours north, remained under Roman Administration for ten years after the deposure of Augustulus, until 486. After this, perhaps another ten years or more, approaching the start of the sixth century, deep within Germany actually only just east of what is now Luxumborg(1), the Roman people of Trier still remained autonomous". Well, there was the empire of Syagrius until 486. But your conclusion is wrong, because your detail information is wrong. Your cardinal error is to believe, Trier was part of Syagrius roman kingdom. In fact, Trier was never part of this last roman remain in middle europe. Syagrius territorry lied exclusively on what today is called France (concentrated around the regions Ile de France and Normandie). The eastern border of Syagrius territory ended roundabout at the valleys of the river Maas (or Meuse in french) and Marne more in the south and Somme in the north, all this is miles west from Trier. During the time Syagrius was defeated, Trier already belonged to the frankish kingdom, called Francia in latin speaking sources, it did no longer belong to Gallia. There are dozens of good maps and books about it, e.g. here http://perso.wanadoo.fr/palladia/finempireoccident.htm (Look at the brown tainted map: The black territory is the frankish kingdom with the city Tournai shown. Tournai is today at the belgian-french border and is situated approx. 130 Kilometers more westwards than Trier). An evidence that trier not belonged to Syagrius kingdom is, that the newly conquered territory in 486 was called "Neustria" (new land) by the new frankish rulers. But Trier never belonged to Neustria, but always to "Austrien" or "Austrasia" (eastern land). The same with today french city of Metz and Reims. So, I don`t know why you insist on your error. You can`t rewrite history without having reliable sources. And thanks for the information, that 6th century refers not to 600's but 500's. Revolutionary! Emettlach 09:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

SKILLED WORKER Actually, I notice, I had not logged in when I made my most significant Wikipedia contribution:

Revision as of 07:48, 11 March 2007 (edit) (undo)63.226.185.4 (Talk) (→Overview: Re-inserted some discussion in a hopefully more relevant way.)Newer edit →

Generally, however, individual skilled workers are more valued to a given company than individual non-skilled workers, as skilled workers tend to be more difficult to replace. As a result, skilled workers tend to demand more in the way of financial compensation because of their efforts. +   + In both skilled and skilled labor alike, the foundation is that he is contributing, not that he is contributing with a special skill or talent. The relevance of a skill or talent is important to its value; as a skill becomes increasingly specialized the fit becomes increasingly more relatively important than the level of talent. Highly paid older workers who have aquired much skill through years of experience are known in both America and other countries such as Germany for taking up to a year using compensation and savings to find again the right fit for their high skills. Low skilled workers are known in America for taking the first opening, a job search only extended involuntarily when told repeatedly "there are no openings" or "business is down" (a.k.a."jobs Americans just won't take"). As highly skilled work becomes increasingly commodotized, economically speaking, "skilled work" becomes just "work." In the face of international competition, the amount of time a skilled worker will tend to spend searching may tend to increase at the very time his expected new position becomes less and less available. This was noticed by German politicians who came up with a proposal to alter the current scheme of government benefits, to disincentivise such workers from not settling for positions below their skill level. +   + Unskilled work is vital to an economy and less vital per capita to an employer. This is an Economics issue. How to rectify this to furter optimise the functioning of an economy? Senator Teddy Kennedy has proposed changes to Social Security to "honor" this hitherto unrecognized portion of national value produced by the lowest paid Americans. On Minnesota Radio, there was recently a discussion about the question of a national salary supplement in South Africa for the lowest paid workers. All such proposals recognise the vital function of unskilled labor. Ever higher comptetion skilled labor must face from itself; correct allocation of skilled labor becomes an ever great issue; the hitherto unrecognized value of unskilled labor is beginning to be recognized by governments; human and machine capital makes greater production, as David Ricardo long ago pointed out, increasing the value of basic human labor as its cost of production, cost of living decreases. Ever harder to master science, ever more skilled or at least quantitative competition or demanding task masters, these put ever more people out of work or make their work ever harder or their employers ever more aloof and harsh; as this happens, the relevance of machinery, of science and of skilled workers decreases. The relevancy of skilled workers decreases to whom? To those put out of work. Reflecting

Speedy deletion nomination of Mahyar Tousi


A tag has been placed on Mahyar Tousi, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ~ Amkgp 💬  15:23, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello, I'm Allthefoxes. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Draft:Mahyar Tousi—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. --allthefoxes (Talk) 09:17, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Problem with your custom signature
You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. A change to Wikipedia's software has made your current custom signature incompatible with the software.

The problem: Your preferences are set to interpret your custom signature as wikitext. However, your current custom signature does not contain any wikitext.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, or you can fix your signature.


 * Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:
 * Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
 * Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
 * Remove anything in the text box.  (It might already be empty.)
 * Click the blue "" button at the bottom of the page. (The red "" button will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)
 * Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:
 * Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
 * Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
 * Click the blue "" button at the bottom of the page.

More information about custom signatures is available at Signatures. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Thank you. 18:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)