User talk:Finlander

Banking

For what it's worth, I have no problem with your applying the term fraction reserve banking to both commercial banks and central banks/treasury departments. However, I agree with the writer of the present article that the more common usage amoung economists is as an explanation of the commercial banking system. I hope my edits of your work didn't turn you against Wikipedia. It happens to everybody: Just when you think you have the article perfect, someone comes along and makes wholesale changes. mydogategodshat 05:10, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Superpower

== 9/11 Terrorism Denial == If you think your views are inadequately represented on September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks, deal with it there. As stated, your soap-boxing edit was out of place on Superpower, where it impedes the readability of an article to which it is periperal and thus amounts to mere vandalism. --Jerzy 05:24, 2004 Jan 4 UTC

The above does not accurately describe your most recent edit on Superpower, and you're entitled to my disavowal of it. You will want to look at my edit on Talk:Superpower. --Jerzy 10:10, 2004 Jan 4 (UTC)

September 11th truth movement

The entry you made at Wikipedia:Current disputes over articles#September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks is now moot, since the link you desired would now target a deleted page. I prefer not to be the one who deletes that entry, tho i am prepared to be the one who requests it be deleted if you neither delete it nor request its deletion. --Jerzy 00:36, 2004 Jan 10 (UTC)

---

OK, so I know you were unhappy with the state of the Socialism article 5-6 weeks ago. I've done a lot of editing since then. Please take a look. I believe it is a much better article now. I'd be interested in your opinion. -- Jmabel 09:37, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

I know that this point is a little moot, but I think that your move of national debt to U.S. national debt would have been done better with the Move page feature. --Smack 22:44, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

9/11 open questions

Hi,

I noticed you are a successful editor for the "9/11 domestic conspiracy theory" page.

I have a page that is being voted on for deletion. My page has links that may be useful to your article.

However, I am not a successful editor. The users who are voting for deletion of my page are also reverting all minor edits or inserts that I make to other pages, in a tag-team fashion. Therefore I cannot try to edit the above mentioned article that you edit.

If you want more links to support your article, you are in a position to harvest them from my article prior to its deletion. My article is called "9/11 open questions".

Perhaps it is the same angry mob that was after your 9/11 Truth Movement article?

Thanks for your time. Bogusstory 20:41, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

U.S. public debt

Hello. I saw the line "Over 47% of the personal income tax (but not of total tax revenue) collected in 2003 was spent on paying interest on the debt." in this article and was pretty incredibly shocked. I quoted it to some other people but a friend told me it was highly suspect so we had a look into it.

I'm sure as hell not an economist (can't stand that stuff) but we looked through the 2005 US. Fiscal Year Mid-Session Review Budget Mega Document Extreme Plus [1] and if I read it correctly, annual income from individual income tax was USD 793.7 billion (Table 16, p44) while outlay on net interest (which my friend tells me is what we're interested in) was USD 153.1 billion. That's only 19%.

I tracked the line in the document down through two dead (i.e. now redirecting) articles and it looks to me like you're the person who wrote it, so I'm wondering if you could explain where the number 47% came from and who's made some mistakes here. Cheers. --Maelin 12:18, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nexus (magazine)

The article Nexus (magazine) has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Deb (talk) 17:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Nexus (magazine) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nexus (magazine) 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/Nexus (magazine) 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. Guy (Help!) 08:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)