User talk:Georgeos Díaz-Montexano

Welcome!

Welcome to the Citizendium! We hope you will contribute boldly and well. You'll probably want to know how to get started as an author. Just look at CZ:Getting Started for other helpful "startup" links, and CZ:Home for the top menu of community pages. Be sure to stay abreast of events via the Citizendium-L (broadcast) mailing list (do join!) and the blog. Please also join the workgroup mailing list(s) that concern your particular interests. You can test out editing in the sandbox if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the forums is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any constable for help, too. Me, for instance! Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and have fun! Larry Sanger 22:52, 4 March 2008 (CST)

Welcome aboard, Georgeos. Just noticed the Calcidius article you started and it looks good. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask me and I'll try to point you in the right direction. --Todd Coles 12:13, 6 March 2008 (CST)

Todd has pointed me in the direction of that article, and I'll do what I can to help, which alas may not be a great deal, given my ignorance of the subject. My first question: I corrected 'subscriptio' to 'subscript' once, but encountering it again, I'm wondering whether the Latin word might not after all be correct. So I'll leave it there for now, hoping to hear from you. Ro Thorpe 11:20, 7 March 2008 (CST)

subscriptio, "a writing beneath, subscription", is Latin word (fem nom sg), and is used by the palaeographists, lexicographists, and philologists, in general. You can see examples of the use of this Latin term (at the International) among all specialists in the Edition "Timaeus Calcidius" by Henricus Aristippus, Brill, 1962. ISBN 0854810528; in the article "The Date and Identity of Macrobius", by Alan Cameron. The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 56, Parts 1 and 2 (1966), pp. 25-38. doi:10.2307/300131. Also in works in others languages like French, in "Paléographie des chartes et des manuscrits du XIe au XVIIe siècle" by A. Aubry; also in "Dictionnaire raisonné de diplomatique chrétienne contenant les notions nécessaires pour l'intelligence des anciens monuments manuscrits". Maximilien Quantin. Chez l'Éditeur. 1846; and in the "Dictionnaire de paléographie de cryptographie, de dactylologie, d'hiéroglyphie, de sténographie et de télégraphie". Louis Mas Latrie, J. P. Migne, éd. 1854, in the page 1162:

"Les signatures sont exprimées dans les anciens titres par des termes qui leur sont particulièrement affectés ou qui leur sont communs avec les sceaux et les chartes mêmes Au nombre des premiers nous comptons subscriptio signatura sacrameiilum propriœ manus paraphas..."

I believe which you no have read my personal page in Citizendium. I know the Latin very well, very best which the English. I bear many years (more of 20) in the studie of Latin, and also old classic greek, and others indoeuropean old languages, and also african and asiatic old languages, like egyptian, phoenician, an hebrew... The palaeography, the lexicography, the etymology, the epigraphy, and other related specialties Philology, in general, are my great pasion and dedication, "in corpore et anima". I am convinced that if you had read my profile, would not have thought that the way subscriptio was a possible error on my part, or a possible impropriety Latin.

In any case, I am very grateful for his concern for wanting to help in my edits, but I insist, in all education and greater respect for all editors of Citizendium, that the biggest and foremost is that I need help in English prose. But, I can guarantee 100% which the use of words in Greek, Latin, Egyptian, phoenician, etc., and any other old languages which I know (as they are listed in my profile) will always be correct. I always revisit many times before publishing; and if you make a mistake in this regard, it is highly likely to discover myself what in the editing process, because I am very jealous of perfection, in relation to the old languages, and applied disciplines such as palaeography and lexicography, among others. Again, I am very grateful... Kind Regrads, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 20:58, 7 March 2008 (CST)

Dear Georgios, Welcome here, and I hope you thrive. I've read your comment on the Talk page of Calcidius. There's no need ususlly to explain changes, corrections or ammendments in detail, a few words in the edit summary is enough. Editors here have their main role in Approval, often only after an article has been completed to a high standard, otherwise editors are mainly authors themselves. Everyone makes mistakes when trying to help, its often best just to accept the good intent and fix them rather than point them out unless it's a major difference of opinion that needs agreement. Often you'll find that a change is a mistake, but is made to try and change something that itself is a bit wrong, so its often worth thinking why did he (or she) want to change that? Often I find that although I disagree with the change that is made it was made for a good reason - perhaps because what was changed was badly phrased unclear or ambiguous. Translation is a difficult art, as you will kow, as a literal translation doesn't always carry the intended meaning. So if the translation doesn't make perfect sense or perfect Engish, it may need copy editing even if literally it is accurate. Gareth Leng 12:18, 8 March 2008 (CST)

Dear Georgios, you wrote: In any case, I insist, in the example of Latin in Calcidius, "apparent vestigia", the correct grammatical and lexicographical translation in Spanish is "aparentes vestigios", and just in the prose of the English, have been retained the two words, also derived from the Latin, with identical meanings, "apparent vestiges"; therefore there is no reason really philological or grammar for to change to the English translation: "visible vestige" This illustrates the problem exactly. The English "apparent vestiges" does not really mean anything - it is so ambiguous that it would probably never be used. It might mean "visible vestiges" or "obvious vestiges" but equally it might mean "things that seem to be vestiges" , (and in the latter case "seem" is also ambiguous). So the words exist in English, but in English they have more meanings, and maybe meanings that have changed slightly. Whatever, "apparent vestiges" is just no good, unless the original was ambiguous in the way that the English is. I'll take a closer look at Calcidius myself though, and think about it more.Gareth Leng 07:38, 9 March 2008 (CDT)

OK, I've started to go through this - a nunmber of references are missing, so I am unsure about these and haven't been able to start to check them. I've removed all "self references" by the way - It's Citizendium policy not to allow these, but have left (and will support retaining) a link to your work in External Links. I'll do more on this article later.Gareth Leng 08:57, 9 March 2008 (CDT)

Mr. Sanger has forbidden me the moral right to be recognized as the author

Mr. Sanger has forbidden me the moral right to be recognized as the author (even with a link abroad)...

From: Larry Sanger <.....@.....>

To: <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Calcidius

Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 13:42:57 -0400

P.S. Further, I am issuing a standing warning. You are not to cite your own work, or write on any topics connected to Atlantis. Again, if you do, I will immediately ban you. You've been warned.

-----Original Message-----

From: Larry Sanger [1]

Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2008 1:22 PM

To: '[email protected]'

Cc: 'Larry Sanger'

Subject: Calcidius

Importance: High

Mr. Díaz-Montexano,

After further examination of your work on the "Calcidius" article, I am

issuing you a formal warning, as Editor-in-Chief.

As you must recall, I made it a condition of your being included in this

project that you would not write to promote your own work. However, you did

• precisely* that in this article, including links to your own work and even

referencing yourself in the article.

If by tomorrow morning you do not remove all references to yourself and your

own work from the "Calcidius" article--and no one else does so for you--I will be banning you from the project.

Lawrence M. Sanger, Ph.D. | http://www.larrysanger.org/

Editor-in-Chief, Citizendium | http://www.citizendium.org/

My reply

Mr. Sanger:

I have not published any articles about my investigations about Plato's Atlantis, but about Calcidius simply to deal with the issue about the origin of Calcidius mandatory use pieces of Timaeus, which shows the tracks which confirm the origin more accepted, because it is the only one that appears in the codices, the subscriptio, namely the fact that he could be a archdeacon of Ossius Bishop of Cordova.

I have been obliged to refer to my name (once in the entire article (and a couple of times in footnotes), for the simple reason that the entire article is an original creation of my intellectual property, which I published my Official Website for more than a year, and have even used as part (with my permission) other encyclopedias. I am very disappointed at the way you are treating me. Usted me being discriminated against even as author.

Well, if my name could not appear anywhere in the article, nor a simple link to my original article on my Website, then Citizendium not authorize the continued use my article to make any derivative work, as my article is protected by copyright, and myself as I am the absolute owner of moral rights and legal Calcidius about this article about, I can authorize its publication and its use (even to make derivative works in an encyclopedia as Citizendium), but I can also suspend or prohibit that right.

It is absolutely unfair, even illegal, that the author of an article is compelled to renounce their moral right to recognition as an author. And that is what you are calling me. Therefore, I demand that the entire article and delete all history, and that the existence of history, remains a public presence, and a distribution of my article without my authorization.

I repeat, if I am to you I do not have even the moral right to be recognized as author of my own article (which I repeat, is a law at the international level), then why not give permission to continue published in Citizendium, nor authorize that keep doing is a derivative work of my article.

If you want to write an article about Calcidius, they will have to start from scratch, and any paragraph, stock, passage or sentence, which is similar, or it can be demonstrated is a modification or conversion of my original article will be considered (as This moment) an act of violation of my rights and my copyright moral rights as author.

I could have been an excellent partner, because it could have written many articles of high quality scientific articles (hundreds) in matters very little known, and in areas where there are few specialists, and they do not have time to work on projects any kind wikipedias (like Citizendium) nor as advisers nor as a publisher, but his contempt for myself, simply by not being a professor of prestigious University graduate in a major, and not having my name in front of a few letters as PH.D., or Dr. (and perhaps because of Spanish origin, and born in a third world country), I have managed to feel deeply humiliated and despised by you.

Therefore, I am deeply disappointed because I thought that would be a different project Citizendium, fairer, more humane and more free, more democratic and, now I see that I was wrong ...

I offer my most sincere apologies for all the trouble and displeasure that my presence in Citizendium may have created you. I wish you much success and a long life, and that you can someday achieve your goal of overcoming Wikipedia.

Regards, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 16:40, 9 March 2008 (CDT)

I simply want to make a few very brief notes and corrections; I do not wish to draw this out into a public debate. First, from the mere fact that the article is "an original creation of [your] intellectual property," it does not follow that you may cite yourself in the article. We have a policy against self-promotion. In no way whatsoever is it either unfair or illegal (anywhere) to disallow a person from citing himself, of course: that all depends on the system/publisher. Moreover, once you submitted your article to the Citizendium, you released it under the CC-by-sa license: see CZ:License. This gives us the right to continue to use it, if we wish, without your permission. On the other hand, we might not want to continue to use it; I will leave that to the people who have been working on it. --Larry Sanger 17:00, 9 March 2008 (CDT)

Dear Sanger:

You confused: international law of intellectual property, clearly said that the original author of an article, the only one who ever owns absolute moral right to be recognized, nobody can deny your name and rightful recognition as author (which is absolutely life), and nobody can do a derivative work using his work, while removing his name, and not recognize their moral rights as author. What you are proposing, and defends, as well as absolutely unfair and it is unethical. That claim is exploiting the intellectual effort of others.

The one who always has the right to grant the use and use of a work (as you want) is the original author of the work; and can also suspend or revoke that right granted, whenever.

If you believe it is preferable to turn this issue into a scandal, and even having to proceed through legal means and the courts, it would be a very unwise decision for someone who always presumed to be a PH.D., Philolosphy precisely because it as a philosopher, you should know very well where are the real limits of justice, kindness, humility, and human rights.

I repeat once again (with all kindness), please as a legitimate author of the article in Calcidius not authorize that my article remains in Citizendium, neither authorize nor that there is a derivative work of my article, in any manner. International law protects me in that law, and said quite clear that I always decide when, how and for how long can assign permissions to distribute, copy or transform my work. And the law also says very clearly that without my express permission (in writing), no one can alter, transform, change, ie, no one can do a derivative work of my article. If you continue editing, ie, transforming my original article, as much as we do, can always demonstrate that they have made a derivative work of my work, without my permission, because from today, I have withdrawn completely. Therefore, all concerned would be violating my moral and legal rights as author, and also could be accused of plagiarism.

Please, once again, I absolutely kindness, which are erased all editions, the first since I published until today. I do not wish to continue working on this project more for the reasons I have already explained, and that need not be repeated, but do not know how to close down my user page.

Regards, --Georgeos Díaz-Montexano 17:44, 9 March 2008 (CDT)

PS. Remember Mr Sanger: "Nothing in this License is intended to reduce, limit, or restrict any uses free from copyright or rights arising from limitations or exceptions that are provided for in connection with the copyright protection under copyright law or other applicable laws."

You are confused about certain license matters, and I'll explain them once, and then, if you still do not understand, let others help you out. Please note that there is a message that appears just under the edit box, when you go to edit a page. The message reads: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here. All original articles and contributions to such articles are available under the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 license." You have essentially donated your work to the community. This does not mean you give up your right to receive credit elsewhere for your writing, of course. But you have licensed your work under CC-by-sa; this is something that you have (whether you know it or not) legally agreed to, already, just as every other contributor to this non-profit project has done.

I believe, however, that given your request we should remove your article if no one else is interested in working on it, and no one else objects. But if there is anyone who wants to keep it, we will.

A constable can close down your user page for you if you like. --Larry Sanger 19:32, 9 March 2008 (CDT)