Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited On Vision and Colors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bernard Bosanquet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Greek tragedy page, your edit caused a cite error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Purely pictorial" means "exclusively pictorial, that is, intuitive and not discursive."Lestrade (talk) 01:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of the proofs of the parallel postulate is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of the proofs of the parallel postulate until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 02:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	Your message of 2006 on Xenophanes
	Only just saw it. Haven't been much of a clued-in user of wikepedia. Thanks for the note of appreciation. J. Sheldon (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2006, you have added the some lines to the topic Baruch Spinoza:

The attraction of Spinoza's philosophy to late eighteenth-century Europeans was that it provided an alternative to Materialism, Atheism, and Deism. Three of Spinoza's ideas strongly appealed to them:

the unity of all that exists;

the regularity of all that happens; and

the identity of spirit and nature.

I am very interested to know where these three ideas are to be found as a list in any literature on the subject? Thanks!

Ingmardb (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it is from Lange, The History of Materialism and Criticism of Its Present Importance [1] — goethean 20:34, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, this is very helpful! I will add references in both articles (Pantheism controversy and Baruch Spinoza). Ingmardb (talk) 23:59, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to look up your addition to the Mortal Coil page, made awhile back, 9 February 2008. I found Parerga und Paralipomena in Google Books and while I don't read German, it sure doesn't look like he's talking about Shakespeare. https://books.google.com/books?id=WuUOAAAAIAAJ&dq=Parerga%20und%20Paralipomena&pg=PA371#v=onepage&q=Parerga%20und%20Paralipomena&f=false You say that he is? 68.175.11.48 (talk) 22:02, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Schopenhauer began § 232a with a reference to Shakespeare’s Hamlet. “The story in Apuleius, of the widow with a vision of her husband who had been murdered at the chase, is wholly analogous to that of Hamlet.” In Apuleis’s Metamorphoses, or The Golden Ass, Book 8, 1-14, Charite’s husband appears to her in a dream and tells her that her suitor Thrasyllus killed him and arranged the murder to look like a hunting accident. Schopenhauer then added: “Here I would like to insert a conjecture concerning Shakespeare’s masterpiece. It is, of course, very bold, yet I would like to submit it to the judgment of those who really know. In the famous monologue: ‘To be or not to be,’ we have the words: ‘when we have shuffled off this mortal coil,’ which have always been considered obscure and even puzzling, and yet have never been thoroughly explained. Should there not have been originally ‘shuttled off’? This verb itself no longer exists, but ‘shuttle’ is an implement used in weaving. Accordingly, the meaning might be: ‘when we have unwound and worked off this coil of mortality.’ A slip of the pen could easily have occurred.” Your Google Books citation does not include § 232a. It goes from § 232 to § 233, skipping §232a.Lestrade (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

I do not know why § 232a is not included in the German-language editions of Parerga and Paralipomena, Volume 2, that are found on the Internet. My copy of the book is published by Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft and it contains § 232a. “Sei hier einer das Meisterstück des Shakespeare betreffenden Konjektur eine Stelle gegönnt, welche zwar sehr kühn ist, die ich jedoch dem Urteil der wirklichen Kenner vorlegen möchte. In den berühmten Monolog ‘To be, or not to be’ ist der Ausdruck: ‘When we have shuffled off this mortal coil’ stets dunkel und sogar rätselhaft befunden und nie ganz aufs reine gebracht worden. Sollte nicht ursprünglich gestanden haben: ‘shuttled off’? Dies Verbum selbst existiert nicht mehr; aber ‘shuttle’ heißt ‘das Weberschiffchen’ und ‘coil’ ein ‘Knäuel,’ wonach der Sinn wäre: ‘Wenn wir diesen Knäuel der Sterblichkeit abgewickelt, abgearbeitet haben.’ Der Schreibfehler konnte leicht entstehn." Lestrade (talk) 01:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

I can only assume that the final edition of P & P contained the reference to Hamlet's mortal coil analogy. The earlier editions or edition did not contain that reference.Lestrade (talk) 20:05, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

Hello, Lestrade. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lestrade. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I see you've been quite active in some things related to the above mentioned pages. I'm pinging you @Lestrade: directly to ask for some help. I've started 3 initiatives for these pages. If you could spare some time in the near future, could you please take a look at the proposal and voice your opinion? Of course, if you have interest, time, and energy to participate that would be amazing!

Here are the projects:

1. Talk:Philosophical_pessimism#A proposal for an overhaul of the article — this initiative is already in progress. The idea is to raise the quality of the page by switching it from a mere historical account to a more encyclopedic format.

2. Talk:Philosophical_pessimism#A proposal to split the History into a dedicated page — related to the one above. The historical account is overly detailed. It would be much better to have a dedicated page for the history of philosophical pessimism and leave only a brief history in the main page.

3. Talk:Antinatalism#A proposal to create a dedicated page for Benatar's axiological asymmetry — here, the idea is to extract the axiological asymmetry argument into a dedicated page. This way, a more detailed presentation could be given. In addition, we could expand on the various responses others philosophers made and counters from Benatar. Other pages could have a brief description and link to the details page.

I hope at least some of this will spark your interest! Fantastiera (talk) 13:59, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of Immanuel Kant's schemata is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of Immanuel Kant's schemata until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

JohnmgKing (talk) 15:52, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]