User talk:Ryratt
Socialist Nazis
[edit]The Nazis were far from socialist, they were funded by big businesses as well as the church. They protected land-owning elites and despised the labor movement. 545lljkr (talk) 22:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
the quote
[edit]-"And they called their movement National Socialism because...?"- That name is merely superficial, let's not forget that they wanted to appeal to the masses. You mentioned the idea of nationalizing, big govt. and so on. Were would you place fascism? The Republican party, being mostly conservative both fiscally and culturally, should advocate lesser spending, right? Not always, Ronald Reagan was conservative in the eyes of the population, but he boosted govt. spending by 50%. George Bush has spent 12 billion $ in Iraq per moth. I'm mentioning this because people who advocate a certain belief don't always do exactly as what their side of the spectrum demands, this is how I see it. Also, one thing, I believe that Fascism is far-right because it embodies the corporate state, the companies who served Hitler, for example, were in fact private. Hitler kept competition to a minimum. Furthermore, fascism views extreme nationalism as a way of keeping people -"safe"- much like, traditional -"values"- etc. These are the reasons as to why I see fascism as far-right, I will check out the link you gave.545lljkr (talk) 18:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Global Warming
[edit]I'm reply to your posts on the global warming talk page [1] here because I don't want to keep making long sections of the global warming talk page longer, but I'm not sure if you want your comments to stand alone in their own section on the global warming talk page. If you do, feel free to copy your post on the talk page into a new section, and add this to it.
The NCPA global warming primer you linked covers a fair amount of ground: more than is covered on just the main global warming article. It is possible that some graphs simliar to those in the primer are needed on the more detailed sub-articles (some of the graphs cover information that is covered in the climate change, greenhouse effect, greenhouse gas, global climate model, Effects of global warming, Adaptation to global warming, mitigation of global warming and Kyoto Protocol articles).
I'm not sure what the "National Center for Policy Analysis"'s copyright situation is on the global warming primer you linked, so I don't know what our policies would be about using or adapting any of the figures, but I suspect that we'd at least need to make graphs ourselves (instead of simply copying them from the primer). Since all of the graphs are sourced to other sources, if we need graphs simliar to ones in the NCPA primer, then it probably makes sense to create the graphs using data directly from the NCPA's sources. Of course, we'd need to make sure that the sources used were reliable sources, but, hopefully, all of the data used in the primer did originate in the peer-reviewed literature, so that part shouldn't be too hard.
My suggestion to you is to read over the various sub-articles and see if you can think of any useful graphics that are missing, look for the best reliable source to get the data for that graph from, and post a suggestion on the article page of the article that needs a new graph for a new graph. Of course, if you can make graphs yourself, just go ahead and do it and, depending on the quality of the article you're adding to, either just put the graph new graph up or post your suggested graph to the article talk page. I should be able to help you make any needed graphs, if that's not your strong suite. - Enuja (talk) 01:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)