Marcosoldfox

Welcome to Wikisource

Hello, Marcosoldfox, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for joining the project. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Help pages, especially for proofreading
• Help:Beginner's guide to Wikisource
• Style guide
• Inclusion policy
• Wikisource:For Wikipedians

You may be interested in participating in

• Proofread of the Month
• Monthly Challenge
• Requested texts

Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{Collaboration/MC}} to your page for current Wikisource projects.

You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.

Have questions? Then please ask them at either

• Wikisource:Scriptorium; or
• Wikisource:Scriptorium/Help

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username if you're logged in (or IP address if you are not) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.

Again, welcome! Inductiveload—talk/contribs 22:19, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Killing time

Comment to User:inductiveload Honestly all I did was just copy it from the CNN article cause I'm just that lazy; thinking on about the copyright thing though, it does seem like since it's just words written I don't think it infringes upon copyright; although I'm no expert on copyright issues. And no, I'm not thinking of sticking around on wikipedia anymore for any longer as it has become somewhat stale to me and honestly I'm slowly starting to care less and less about politics. Nowadays every time we turn on the TV and see something on the news lately, it's always bad news etc. and politics is becoming a stale topic, to be sincere. Also wikipedia isn't as fun as how it used to be as I remember in like, 6 years ago when everything was new and blossoming, and even creating new articles about all weird topics were fun -- as for instance creating articles about heavy metal genres, death metal bands etc. Nowadays politics is getting so boring that it's not even worth to spend too much time on it, much less research about politics -- which is getting less interesting by the day. And yeah, also taking in the fact that writing seriously on wikipedia takes too long of my time for it to be just some hobby to pass the time when I'm feeling awfully bored. I'd rather just go on to write myself short stories, essays on philosophy, literature etc., and research deeper into philosophy. Been thinking of mostly writing short stories for myself. I'm writing this collection of short stories of literature that, to be honest, are really more interesting than speculating on this-and-that on White House stuff etc. Honestly I don't plan to even edit more stuff on this or in politics in general cause I don't have anything interesting to say anymore -- it is become a sort of a time-killer. I'm losing interest, while philosophy and literature are becoming my prime interests and I've been reading a ton of continental philosophy books that seem to catch more of my interest. Speaking of which, I've come to notice that you have posted books on wikimedia about Schopenhauer on your contribution page, and that's pretty cool. I've been reading a lot of Schopenhauer and Nietzsche as of lately and I'd love to discuss philosophical questions; Anyway though, I think that the essays of Schopenhauer are actually his best ones and much more entertaining to read than The World as Will and Representation, the latter of which, although is the "culmination of Schopenhauer's thought", is still not terribly well-stylized -- well, not as much as Schopenhauer's later Essays anyway. But either way, I'd love to discuss philosophy with you, especially if it's about Schopenhauer and Nietzsche (my two favorite philosophers). Perhaps we can converse about expanding on Arthur Schopenhauer's article series, perhaps? I happen to think that it lacks a lot of articles that should honestly be written about Schopenhauer and put into a series on it. For example the issue on Schopenhauer's view on Animal Rights should be expanded into its own full-article, I believe, and not just a small subsection on here: Animal Rights#Arthur Schopenhauer. I also happen to think that a topic solely purported to the Influence of Arthur Schopenhauer on posterior philosophers merits its own separate article too; and I'd actually enjoy seeing these articles made and put into a series. That'd be cool. Sorry if you wanted stuff on other issues but for the moment what seems most interesting to me is the philosophy aspect of things; the rest is becoming boring. Would you like to collective-edit/create articles on Schopenhauer at some time? I'd suggest starting with his theme on Animal Rights and then about a separate article on his influence on other philosophers. Thank you a lot for commenting.Marcosoldfox (talk) 05:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi! Following up from your comment here to keep it separate from the tedious copyright stuff.

To be honest, I haven't really read any of the Schopenhauer yet, I was just tidying it up by attaching it to a scanned version and making it possible to export as an EPUB for use on e-readers. I also generally don't spend much time at Wikipedia, though I have made a few small articles, mostly for backing up things here at the patrician's choice: Wikisource.

I can totally understand that it's a bit of time sink to stick around. I only suggested politics due to the contribution subject, we do have other things! If you ever want to come back, even just to slot in a single article to a literary review or some oddball short story or something, please always feel free to drop me a note and I'll give you a hand if I'm around. I'll be more than happy to upload a scan if needed to get you started on something. As you have probably noticed, there are yawning chasms in our collections, so always something to do on a rainy Wednesday if your muses aren't whispering that day...

I'm sorry the Trump transcript isn't a slam-dunk obviously-PD case, but the jury's still out and I'm hoping we can determine we think it's OK! Anyway, good luck with your short stories and if you do wind up working on philosophy or literature topics on Wikipedia or elsewhere, please do hit us up to provide primary sources. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 06:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

CommentYeah, thanks for being welcoming -- I do appreciate it; and there's no problem that you haven't read Schopenhauer yet -- it's just that I saw it on your contribution page and thought you were into that philosophy, and that was the reason why you uploaded it. But now that I think of it, here on Wikisource other users upload and scan everything they get -- it must be the reason of sourcing/archiving in the first place as it helps to have a huge source for all of sorts of things... and obviously no one has the time to read everything -- not even the most pedantic bookworm. Even less now considering the ever-expanding amount of information available online. I really do enjoy it though that you've been welcoming so far and that is nice. Although dealing with the copyright thing must be a bore for everyone wanting to upload stuff here on Wikisource though, I guess that's just the rule on copyright as Wiki. As far as I remember wiki has always tried to keep itself copyright-restriction free, as far as I can remember using it way, way back on earlier wikipedia days; and posting any image was more difficult than it is today. Things might be easier now though, considering the increasing speed of the internet. Sorry if it might be a bummer but I don't have anything more on the issue of politics though; I'd really love to have more stuff to talk about but I'm as bone-dry, and not much invested in it anymore. I've found that stressing over all things political will eventually rot your brain because of how fast information goes on and off and it's better to just give it a rest -- that's why I'm thinking of giving a break on editing on wikipedia for some considerable time on political issues. It's too stressful for a hobby time-killer anyway... Either way, I appreciate your cooperation etc. -- it's definitely welcoming.

P.S. About the Schopenhauer topic though, I have to inform that he's a really, really interesting philosopher, with a lot of profound, thought-provoking ideas; although I think that everyone approaching him should start with a skeptical outlook on him, and not believe everything he says on face-value. So, it's not that Schopenhauer is necessarily right in his conclusions on things; rather, it's more about how he gets there, and how he creates a philosophical discourse that stimulates and exercises the mind that reflect his genius. It's about the method that he takes the reader in considering and thinking over things; and not as much as his conclusions -- and it's important to warn that it's precisely his conclusions which are somewhat dangerous cause of how inherently pessimistic they are; and that may lead some people to unwanted places... specially if they can't put things in a proper perspective philosophically. With regards Schopenhauer, I think his genius reflects more on the process of his thinking and the erudition that you'd get from reading his essays, and how he strangely sounds "modern" considering he was born in 18th Century -- a really, really long time ago... His talent comes from the process of his intellect and not as much as the conclusions he reaches, which I think that although they aren't 100% right, they still do hold a lot of merit. I think that his perspective on Animal Rights is especially modern and intelligent considering how many centuries have passed since he last lived. If you do come to read his works though, start with his Essays (his main work wikipedia:The_World_as_Will_and Representation is notoriously complicated to read) and not The World as Will, and don't feel discouraged. And although his ultimate idea though on the concepts of Will and Representation as different aspects of reality seem to be, in hindsight, a little bit too simplistic, his philosophical method ends up being the most important aspect of his work and it really does make it worth a read. Just be sure to start with his Essays first, if you're going to start! Thanks for your support.Marcosoldfox (talk) 06:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

I'll keep it I mind when I get round to reading it, thanks!

Good luck with your endeavours and do remember not to get sucked into the exhausting political nonsense too much! Sometimes you just need to read about Romanian Easter eggs or an Ode to a Ring Nebula! Inductiveload—talk/contribs 07:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, hi! Tip for a stress-free life: relax about the transcript. We'll discuss it at Wikisource:Copyright discussions and if we keep it, we keep it; if it's deemed a copyvio, we'll have to delete it. It's not clear to me which way it'll go, it's not an obvious slum-dunk case either way. In the meantime: ooh shiny! Inductiveload—talk/contribs 19:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Neutrality

We don't editorialise sources, no matter what we do or don't think of the subject. Please don't do this. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 09:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

OK, that's enough of that, I've turned off your ability to edit that page for a week. You're still welcome to edit, constructively, elsewhere. Inductiveload—talk/contribs 10:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)