drs. Tudor Georgescu or T. Georgescu, BSc, M[1]
| Wikipedia:Babel | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Search user languages |
Romanian citizen by birth, Dutch subject by naturalization (double nationality, thus).
Diplomas:
- 1991 Baccalaureate[2] and Professional Qualification Certificate from Informatics Lyceum no. 1 Bucharest (now called Tudor Vianu National College of Computer Science);
- 1999 License in Philosophy from University of Bucharest (comparable to Master of Arts);
- 2004 Propedeutic diploma in Sociology from University of Amsterdam;
- 2007 Bachelor of Science in Sociology (BSc), University of Amsterdam. Specialization: work, organizations and policy sociology.
- 2008 Obtained permission to bear the title drs.[3] title from Informatie Beheer Groep, the Dutch institution which recognizes foreign diplomas.
Member of the Dutch Sociological Association
Member of Mensa Netherlands and Mensa Romania, which belong to Mensa International, Ltd.[4]
Member of Dutch Society Against Quackery.
Member and friend of File Threads Database. FTD has been replaced by SpotNet.
Spoken languages: Romanian, English, French, Dutch (level 4, now called level B2, according to diploma NT2-II, do not confuse it with Wikipedia:Babel level 4, which would mean native or near-native speaker).
Reads and understands: Italian and a bit of Spanish.
Favorite authors: M. Heidegger, H.G. Gadamer, C.G. Jung, Leo Strauss, Allan Bloom.
Religious qualifications: Bible knower (in respect to the literal meaning of the verses; through self-study). From a Sola Scriptura perspective, I am a god and a Son of God.
Hacker (hobbyist) (hardware modder; I am no cracker[5] and no haxor, since my identity as hacker is based upon hacking the Device Configuration Overlay for certain hard discs). Accordingly, my psychological profile is listed on the following sites: Hacker's Manifesto, A Cyberpunk Manifesto.
Online references: from Dan A. Lazarescu (Ad-Vitam Sovereign Grand Commander) and from Lucian G. Iordanescu (Fr. Hermes)
Briefly: I am committed, for the most part, much more to truth than to tribe. For The True Believer I'm from Satan with a mission to deny WP:THETRUTH.
A word for newbies which I seem to be in conflict with
Wikipedia has WP:RULES which govern how editors should edit, how should they behave and how conflict gets mediated. Everybody is entitled to occasional mistakes, but persisting in mistakes will get you blocked from editing. Our wish is, however, that WP:RULES breakers repent from violating our rules and become instead productive editors. The decision to obey our rules is always personal, but it has enormous consequences for one's activity inside Wikipedia. I cannot decide for you, but I can tell you that it is wise to obey our rules. So, it's not that I like to see you blocked. I would like that you learn from your mistakes and become a productive editor. But if you are not up to the task, you will be blocked. I cannot ban you, in fact there is a single editor able to ban you from Wikipedia, that editor is you. The key point about getting to read about our rules is changing your behavior. We want you to behave according to the rules of our encyclopedia, if you cannot behave you will be blocked or banned.
I only revert edits for which it is clear to me that they are WP:CB (speaking from the viewpoint of academic learning), deteriorate the article or violate WP:RULES. I don't revert if these are uncertain. I think that you need to make up your mind if you are for or against our WP:RULES. If you're against our rules and act on that, you'll soon find yourself in hot water. If your edits are WP:PAG-compliant, they will likely stay, otherwise every experienced editor will have to revert you. By saying this I am not aggressive, I just tell it as it is. (Dutchies don't beat around the bush, but bluntly tell you what's wrong.) I'm blunt but not mean. I could appear mean, but in fact I am only defending the norms and values of this website. I am very hard with bigots, but reasonable and conciliatory with reasonable people. With people which present themselves as reasonable, I am much more conciliatory than other experienced users.
I don't hate editors as persons; I hate rule-breaking. I consider that any editor can change his/her mind/behavior at any moment. Few edit warriors do that, but that's another matter. As long as you know when to stop, you can get away with almost anything at Wikipedia. It's not the mistake which is a matter of being blocked or banned, but persisting in that mistake. Exceptions: outing and legal threats.
I'm not absurd: if you give me WP:RS showing that you're right, I will write myself from your POV.
Wikipedia has a purpose, it has norms and values; those who violate these get blocked or banned.
"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."[6]
| “ | A little bird was flying south for the Winter. It was so cold the bird froze and fell to the ground into a large field.
While he was lying there, a cow came by and dropped some dung on him. As the frozen bird lay there in the pile of cow dung, he began to realize how warm he was. The dung was actually thawing him out! He lay there all warm and happy, and soon began to sing for joy. A passing cat heard the bird singing and came to investigate. Following the sound, the cat discovered the bird under the pile of cow dung, and promptly dug him out and ate him. Morals of the story: (1) Not everyone who shits on you is your enemy. (2) Not everyone who gets you out of shit is your friend. (3) And when you're in deep shit, it's best to keep your mouth shut! |
” |
What Wikipedia is
I will give you the basic rule of Wikipedia: we have to find to the best of our abilities what the academic mainstream says and then kowtow to it. See WP:ABIAS.
Barnstars and such
| This user is a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians.
The motto of the AIW is conservata veritate, which translates to "with the preserved truth". |
|
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
| Many thanks for your tireless efforts in keeping articles clear of spam and other nonsense. Wikipedia is a better quality project because of hardworking and conscientious editors like you!--Hu12 (talk) 14:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
| This is for all your tireless and heroic efforts last night defending the article Yahweh from our perennial troll friend Wittgenstein123, even in the face of some seriously deranged (and somewhat incomprehensible) attacks on your personal character. I am sure he will probably return eventually, but, for now, I just wanted to let you to know how much I appreciate your work. Thank you so much! --Katolophyromai (talk) 02:28, 20 January 2018 (UTC) |
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Many thanks for your help with the translation project! Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC) |
|
The Purple Barnstar | |
| For acting reasonably even when doing so aggravates the unreasonable. John Carter (talk) 02:19, 22 December 2017 (UTC) |
|
The LGBT Barnstar | |
| For the work done in editing the articles regarding the LGBT community and for the firm activity against bigots inside Wikipedia. Alexandru M., 8 februarie 2017, 12:41 (EET) |
Wikipedia activity
Name confusion
I am not dr. Tudor V. Georgescu, I am drs. Tudor Al. Georgescu.
Books
- Georgescu, Tudor (2000). Doctrina liberala. Revolutia conceptuala si centrul transcendent (in Romanian). Bucharest: Editura Semne. ISBN 973-654-035-9.
- Middel, Alex; Georgescu, Tudor (2008). Le Nobel, Bob (ed.). Alle wegen leiden naar... Roemenië! (in Dutch). London: Lulu.com.
April Fools' joke
— Knock, knock.
— Who's there?
— We're missionaries.
— What do you want?
— We preach the word of Freud, Marx and Darwin.
Why am I a god and a Son of God?
According to Psalms 82:6, all human beings are gods and Sons of God. According to John 10:33-36, wherein John is quoting Jesus Christ's own words, all human beings who heard the Scripture talking to them (e.g. heard the Scripture being preached by a priest or pastor inside a church) are gods. According to Acts 17:28, all human beings are the offspring of God (Elohim, YHWH). Till here this is simply reading what the Bible has to say, literally, without any kind of "interpretation" (other than the purely literal one). The Bible is a print-published source, peer reviewed by Dr. Jerome of Stridonium and Dr. Martin Luther (they established two different canons for the Bible; both such canons regard as valid and authoritative all verses quoted in this argument).
All humans are thus gods and Sons of God. I am a human being (and I heard the Scripture being preached in churches), therefore I am a god and a Son (offspring) of Elohim (YHWH). This is a valid syllogism based upon assumptions derived from the Bible. Does it count as interpolation? Since Sir Francis Bacon[7] affirmed that syllogisms are no tool meant to increase our knowledge (or: science), we may consider that performing a syllogism upon some assumptions is not interpolation. This is thus encyclopedic knowledge according to Wikipedia:Verifiability criteria.[8] Not.
By the way, Genesis 6:2,4 and Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 speak about the Sons of God (using a capital letter is justified, since the Hebrew writing does not have capital letters, thus as far as the Bible authors are concerned "sons of God" and "Sons of God" are one and the same "thing", or the same idea). Therefore the Bible says that God has more than one Son.
So, I do not claim such titles only for myself[9], but for everybody else as well, because so says the Word of God expressed in the Holy Bible. The good news of the Bible tells you that you are a living god, making you thus aware of your divine nature.
I don't want to be associated with the absurdities of the Bible. Therefore, I make it more clear: the above is not my opinion about the Bible, but the opinion of the Bible about me. Is it absurd? Yes. Is it my absurdity? No.
Cracking my PC
Hack tools used against my PC will be reported to Moscow.
Footnotes
- ^ I do not formally have the legal right to bear the title "Master of Arts" together with my name. However, MA is the common (customary) English translation of my title "license in philosophy" from University of Bucharest, Romania. Also, MA would be the proper English translation of my Dutch title drs., since this title has been replaced with MA following the Bologna process, in so far as philosophy graduates are concerned. I do have the legal right to bear the title BSc together with my name. I use the degree M as stipulated by Dutch rules for translating pre-Bologna Dutch titles to post-Bologna international degrees, which do not allow me to use MA, but I have to use M instead. A combination of M with BSc is allowed according to Drs. A Jansen, MBA?, since they are different titles (i.e. my BSc was not a prerequisite for obtaining my M).
- ^ The Romanian baccalaureate is no BA or BSc, it counts as high-school diploma, i.e. the diploma for finishing general and mandatory secondary education.
- ^ I.e., doctorandus; drs. is equal to MA in the Bachelor/Master system, in so far as philosophy graduates are concerned. The Netherlands recently introduced the Bachelor/Master system (according to the Bologna process); in such system change the old title doctorandus was replaced by the degrees MA and MSc, which are equal in value with drs.
- ^ See membership card and membership card (verso).
- ^ "The basic difference is this: hackers build things, crackers break them." E.S. Raymond How To Become a Hacker
- ^ Star Trek - First Contact (1996) Moviesoundclips.net. Rikeromega3 Productions 1999-2013. Retrieved September 26, 2013.
- ^ Baron of Verulam, Viscount of St. Alban.
- ^ It's just tongue in cheek; don't take it seriously. Actually, you should never WP:VERify claims to WP:PRIMARY religious sources.
- ^ ... since I am not delusional about it. All I did is properly read what the Bible has to say about this issue. I am guilty of no more than plain reading. If a reading disability is preventing you from understanding the literal meaning of these Bible verses, I recommend you the program Kurzweil 3000. If theologians had such a program some thousands years ago, a lot of churchly dogmas would have been written substantially differently from today's version.
