User talk:JzG/Archive 79
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
help defeat zaphod
Can you stop zaphod? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannymilliren (talk • contribs) 20:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
It's amazing how the walls have come tumbling down. Too bad things have turned out this way considering how involved he's been in quite a bit of excellent humanitarian work especially with respect to the fight against cancer. You did your best to keep his article accurate despite early pushes to taint it with information that has unfortunately inevitably come to be known as fact. 85.170.164.197 (talk) 16:27, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think ;-). It's very sad; I always suspected this (the Dr. Ferrari connection is telling) but our policy is very clear: Wikipedia may not blaze the trail in these things. History will be the best judge, and it's unlikely we'll have a really balanced view for at least another decade. It's unfortunate that the editor on a crusade to unmask Armstrong couldn't seem to understand this, he'd have got his views reflected to a much greater degree if he hadn't been so confrontational. As it is, presented with a statement that is weakly sourced, strongly disputed and subject to legal action, we have only one answer open to us: no. Not that I was ever an Armstrong fan, I am with the French here: he didn't pay his dues by riding full classic seasons (unlike our man Wiggo, who is a hero). But I certainly don't think he's a bad or evil man, just a massively competitive one. Guy (Help!) 16:34, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Re: Fool's hammer
- Malleus fatuorum" means "hammer of the fatuous". He behaved as if he believed it to be real rather than ironic
I'm not sure that's right. "Fool's hammer" refers to several things, and apparently there was such a thing as a "fool's hammer", but I'm not convinced he's being that literal. For me, the "fool's hammer" in this context refers to the relationship between smithing and writing. The smiths "were craftsmen who shaped or formed metal with hammer blows", and this is often compared to the process of writing, where a writer hammers foolish words into good prose. So he is really referring to the art of the wordsmith with his user name. The fool in this case may very well be The Fool represented by the Tarot, particularly theThoth tarot deck, where the Fool is the archetypal young protagonist, Percival on his quest, "pregnant" with creative ideas, which is what the writer depends upon for his sustenance. Coincidentally, this is identical to the concept of viriditas. Viriditas (talk) 03:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
- Well, you may be right (I am no Latin scholar), but the fact is that Malleus came across as being ona crusade, and was going about it in a way that made it pretty hard to get along with him. It's another example of what I think of as "the Giano problem". We handle this kind of thing atrociously. Guy (Help!) 06:55, 24 October 2012 (UTC)