| Revision as of 19:47, 22 February 2006 edit65.64.101.51 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:47, 14 March 2023 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,670,192 editsm Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <font> (9x)Tag: Fixed lint errors | ||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 150: | Line 150: | ||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
| Hi. If you are going to block ], you should notify the user. The talk page still says they won't be blocked until further vandalism. - < |
Hi. If you are going to block ], you should notify the user. The talk page still says they won't be blocked until further vandalism. - <span style="color: red;">]</span><span style="color: blue;">]</span><span style="color: red;">]</span><!-- TANSTAAFL --> 19:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :Dude, give a guy a minute to write something coherent when there isn't a convenient template for this situation. ;-) Consider it done. Cheers, --] <small>]</small> 19:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | :Dude, give a guy a minute to write something coherent when there isn't a convenient template for this situation. ;-) Consider it done. Cheers, --] <small>]</small> 19:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| Coherent? Dang, I've never tried that! Um... how does it work? Oh! I know: {{tl|coherent template}}- < |
Coherent? Dang, I've never tried that! Um... how does it work? Oh! I know: {{tl|coherent template}}- <span style="color: red;">]</span><span style="color: blue;">]</span><span style="color: red;">]</span><!-- TANSTAAFL --> 19:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ==Sleeper accounts== | ==Sleeper accounts== | ||
| Line 172: | Line 172: | ||
| ==JIT compilation== | ==JIT compilation== | ||
| You wrote: ''compilation to native code irrelevant (besides, modern JVMs are often faster than native compilers)''. Please explain how the time taken by JIT is "irrelevant". It's not free, and it has to be done every time a class is loaded for the first time in a given JVM. – ]\<sup>< |
You wrote: ''compilation to native code irrelevant (besides, modern JVMs are often faster than native compilers)''. Please explain how the time taken by JIT is "irrelevant". It's not free, and it has to be done every time a class is loaded for the first time in a given JVM. – ]\<sup><span style="color: gray;">]</span></sup> 18:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :You have to look at the diff. Here's what it used to say: | :You have to look at the diff. Here's what it used to say: | ||
| Line 184: | Line 184: | ||
| :I never said that the time taken by a compiler (be it JIT or offline) is irrelevant. The point of the paragraph was to say that the Java language has certain features or makes certain guarantees that could be seen to impose a performance penalty. The qualification "even if native compilation is used" is a strawman: the discussion is about language features, so they apply to all compilation and runtime models. In addition, offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM. So not only is the "even if" qualification irrelevant to the discussion of array bounds checking etc., it is also misleading because it falsely suggests that offline compilation is somehow less affected. The fact is that several things have to happen at runtime (array bounds checking, byte code verification and run-time type checking for dynamic loading), and this will be true no matter what the underlying compilation or execution model is. --] <small>]</small> 20:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC) | :I never said that the time taken by a compiler (be it JIT or offline) is irrelevant. The point of the paragraph was to say that the Java language has certain features or makes certain guarantees that could be seen to impose a performance penalty. The qualification "even if native compilation is used" is a strawman: the discussion is about language features, so they apply to all compilation and runtime models. In addition, offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM. So not only is the "even if" qualification irrelevant to the discussion of array bounds checking etc., it is also misleading because it falsely suggests that offline compilation is somehow less affected. The fact is that several things have to happen at runtime (array bounds checking, byte code verification and run-time type checking for dynamic loading), and this will be true no matter what the underlying compilation or execution model is. --] <small>]</small> 20:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| Alright, but how can you say that "offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM"? – ]\<sup>< |
Alright, but how can you say that "offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM"? – ]\<sup><span style="color: gray;">]</span></sup> 11:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :Try it yourself. Take your favorite Java benchmark, compile it using GCJ or some other native compiler and compare that with running the bytecode on the 1.6 server VM (or even 1.5). Even if compiler technology improves, there's still a problem: separate offline compilation makes it hard to perform certain optimizations, like for example devirtualization. A JIT compiler has an inherent advantage there. --] <small>]</small> 22:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC) | :Try it yourself. Take your favorite Java benchmark, compile it using GCJ or some other native compiler and compare that with running the bytecode on the 1.6 server VM (or even 1.5). Even if compiler technology improves, there's still a problem: separate offline compilation makes it hard to perform certain optimizations, like for example devirtualization. A JIT compiler has an inherent advantage there. --] <small>]</small> 22:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| Thanks. – ]\<sup>< |
Thanks. – ]\<sup><span style="color: gray;">]</span></sup> 13:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
| Line 224: | Line 224: | ||
| ==Re: Category:Ancient peoples of China== | ==Re: Category:Ancient peoples of China== | ||
| <cite id=Re:_Category:Ancient_peoples_of_China_reply_1> </cite> Thanks for the answer Mark. :-D — ]] 22:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC) | <cite id=Re:_Category:Ancient_peoples_of_China_reply_1> </cite> Thanks for the answer Mark. :-D — ]] 22:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC) | ||
| Your continued donations keep Misplaced Pages running! | |||
| User talk:MarkSweep/archive2 | |||
| < User talk:MarkSweep | |||
| (Difference between revisions) | |||
| Jump to: navigation, search | |||
| Revision as of 07:46, 18 May 2005 | |||
| MarkSweep (Talk | contribs) | |||
| archiving | |||
| ← Older edit Current revision | |||
| 66.142.56.31 (Talk | contribs) | |||
| Spelled/spelt etc. | |||
| Line 33: Line 33: | |||
| :::::Of course — but then you'd have evidence of recent accepted usage too, and wouldn't need to appeal to the older usage. Having said that, there are many other problems, not least being dialect. (I remember the first time I used the word 'mardy' after moving to London at the age of eighteen; I'd no idea that it wasn't standard English. I could have looked it up in a dictionary, of course, but children don't generally look up words that they know (unless they're rude words, of course; my image of the French was very peculiar for a long time after reading in an old French-English dictionary an illustrative use of the verb 'pisser': 'pisser au feu'). :::::Of course — but then you'd have evidence of recent accepted usage too, and wouldn't need to appeal to the older usage. Having said that, there are many other problems, not least being dialect. (I remember the first time I used the word 'mardy' after moving to London at the age of eighteen; I'd no idea that it wasn't standard English. I could have looked it up in a dictionary, of course, but children don't generally look up words that they know (unless they're rude words, of course; my image of the French was very peculiar for a long time after reading in an old French-English dictionary an illustrative use of the verb 'pisser': 'pisser au feu'). | |||
| :::::When alternative forms exist side by side, they're often not geographical, though those who use one form or the other sometimes think that they are. And, of course, people often simply don't know that there are alternative spelings (on one page I've had one anonymous user repeatedly changing my use of 'artefact' to 'artifact', insisting (though not in so many words) that I'm illiterate). :::::When alternative forms exist side by side, they're often not geographical, though those who use one form or the other sometimes think that they are. And, of course, people often simply don't know that there are alternative spelings (on one page I've had one anonymous user repeatedly changing my use of 'artefact' to 'artifact', insisting (though not in so many words) that I'm illiterate). | |||
| - :::::Oh, by the way, 'mardy' isn't easily translated into standard English; someone who's mardy is a sulky spoilsport — at least, in Lincolnshire. ] 09:22, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) + :::::Oh, by the way, 'mardy' isn't easily translated into standard English; someone who's mardy is a sulky spoilsport — at least, in Lincolnshire. ] 09:22, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)Your continued donations keep Misplaced Pages running! | |||
| + User talk:HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + (Difference between revisions) | |||
| + Jump to: navigation, search | |||
| + Revision as of 01:49, 19 February 2006 | |||
| + TastyCakes (Talk | contribs) | |||
| + User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message | |||
| + ← Older edit Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 | |||
| + HerrGoebbles (Talk | contribs) | |||
| + ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| + Newer edit → | |||
| + Line 37: Line 37: | |||
| + | |||
| + :One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. ] 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) :One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. ] 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + + | |||
| + + == ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE == | |||
| + + | |||
| + + MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| + + | |||
| + + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| + | |||
| + Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 | |||
| + Welcom wikipedia! | |||
| + | |||
| + I kiss you!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + Allahu Akbar! | |||
| + | |||
| + Usammey 07:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + Thanks for experimenting with Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Looper5920 07:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + Contents | |||
| + 1 Hello | |||
| + 2 Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda | |||
| + 3 User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message | |||
| + 4 ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + Hello | |||
| + What a life!!! Sitting around and producing propaganda for the masses!!! I hope you enjoy your hobby. You know controlling information is but one step away from controlling peoples thought processes. With time and practice, you too will become a well versed student of revisionist history. | |||
| + | |||
| + Here is to an exciting and wonderful future!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + Herr Goebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + Hello. Actually I don't consider the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on." to be very useful information. But if by "writing revisionist history" you mean deleting dumb ass comments by people like you, then yes it does give me a sort of sick satisfaction. Enjoy your brief window of not being banned. TastyCakes 07:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda | |||
| + Greetings, it is Germany 1939 all over again. Admin Mark Sweep and user TastyCakes conspire to silence another Misplaced Pages user that they find objectionable. After being called a "Dumb Ass" by user TastyCakes, and without any warning, Admin Mark Sweep, a former US Marine, has used his abilities as an admin to infinitely block my user priviledges. And all based on his personal dislike of my username, and his comradeship with user TastyCakes who were offended by a few harmless WORDS!!! Welcome to the world of those few who are endowed with superior genetics, and the ability to control what we read and learn!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + I'm not offended by your words, I just don't think they should be in Misplaced Pages because they suck. And apparently I'm not alone. Take care, TastyCakes 00:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message | |||
| + Greetings All!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + Once again, the user TastyCakes showcases her superior intellect and reasoning in her response. Had TastyCakes followed the history of the original edits to US History and Expansion, TastyCakes would have seen that HerrGoebbles was only trying to add new information regarding the brutal consequences of US government sanctioned practices, which are clearly stated at the US Department of State website under: "Indian Treaties and the Removal act of 1830". Instead, user TastyCakes and an admin MarkSweep took it upon themselves to block user HerrGoebbles with absolutely no warning. This seems to be an accepted practice on Misplaced Pages embraced by a few users and Admins who wish to control and block any possibility of discussion about reality. | |||
| + | |||
| + Welcome to The New World!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| + MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:HerrGoebbles" | |||
| + ViewsUser page Discussion View source History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation | |||
| + Main Page | |||
| + Community Portal | |||
| + Current events | |||
| + Recent changes | |||
| + Random article | |||
| + Help | |||
| + Contact Misplaced Pages | |||
| + Donations | |||
| + Search | |||
| + Toolbox | |||
| + What links here | |||
| + Related changes | |||
| + User contributions | |||
| + Upload file | |||
| + Special pages | |||
| + Printable version | |||
| + Permanent link | |||
| + | |||
| + Privacy policy About Misplaced Pages Disclaimers | |||
| + | |||
| ==]== ==]== | |||
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| Current revision | |||
| Contents | |||
| 1 Image:Spoon-lure.png | |||
| 2 Commons:Taxonomy | |||
| 3 Spelled/spelt etc. | |||
| 4 Template:TAL episode | |||
| 5 PRC, ROC, mainland China, Taiwan, etc. | |||
| 6 Image deletion | |||
| 7 RfC | |||
| 8 Deleting Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png | |||
| 9 "Mainland China" in titles | |||
| 10 Template:deletebecauseoncommons | |||
| 11 Gnuplot | |||
| 12 Proposed reorganization of Taiwan | |||
| 13 The proposed resolution to the RFC arising from the Sollog page | |||
| 14 Patent template | |||
| 15 Cauchy Distribution graphic | |||
| 16 Your vote is needed! | |||
| 17 Arbitration | |||
| 18 Re: Template:Isd | |||
| 19 Thanks Mark for helping on the "Junkyard" Article! | |||
| 20 Unverified orphans | |||
| 21 Please come and vote! | |||
| 22 binomial (disambiguation) | |||
| 23 Plea for help | |||
| 24 RfA thanks | |||
| 25 Help with inserting image from commons in wikipedia | |||
| 26 "China"/"PRC" vs. "mainland China" for page titles | |||
| 27 I need your help | |||
| 28 Instantnood RFAr | |||
| 29 Roasted coffee | |||
| 30 Re: Archiving | |||
| 31 Commons vs Misplaced Pages question | |||
| 32 Misplaced Pages:Chinese naming controversy | |||
| 33 Request for help | |||
| 34 Gamma & inv-gamma plots | |||
| 35 Cburnett's admin nomination | |||
| 36 Please explain | |||
| 37 Amicus curiosus brief | |||
| 38 Rendering Math | |||
| Image:Spoon-lure.png | |||
| Hi. You tagged this for cleanup. I've replaced it in the article (Spoon lure) with Image:SpoonLureWithCrosssection.png, which I drew from scratch. It's still kinda crude, but at least it's symmetrical (and more accurate from what I remember--it's been a long time since I've gone fishing). Is that the level of improvement you had in mind, or should I mark it for further cleanup? Niteowlneils 22:09, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks. I was hoping it could be redrawn in a vector graphics program like Inkscape, Ipe, or good old XFig. With transparent background and antialiasing. I've put up a request over at Misplaced Pages:Image recreation requests. --MarkSweep 01:55, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| OK. At least it's a better (IMHO, of course) placeholder until a more sophisticated one is developed. Anyway, it was only the third image I'd editted with any graphics program, and the first I started from scratch, so it was good practice. First was Image:SanJoseMapWithLAFCOandCityLabelsandCA.png--you can see what I started with at the top of the Stick Map section; second was removing the background clutter of Image:MeerkatAtHappyHollow.jpg and uploading to commons Commons:Image:MeerkatAtHappyHollow.jpg. How about Image:Hammersmith and city line.png on commons to replace the one on en:? Most everything but Plaistow seems legible now. I think to get any better it would have to be changed to a vertical orientation, which would also have the advantage of fitting nicely in the right margin instead of leaving so much white space across the entire page. I could do it, but certainly not tonight--I'm going to turn into a pumpkin soon. Niteowlneils 04:45, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I agree that your replacement is a great improvement over the original, I didn't mean to dismiss your contribution. The schematic drawing may be OK, because drawing a reflective surface by hand is extremely difficult. However, there are people here who are good with ray-tracers (see e.g. Image:Dodecahedron.jpg); a ray-traced image of a spoon lure would make a fantastic illustration. The other line drawings you mentioned are also improvements. They can be improved further, by the use of anti-aliasing. What I sometimes do in Gimp is to start with a design size that's an integer multiple of the intended maximal final size. So for the subway map, I would start with an image 4500 pixels wide, use a readable vector font for the labels, and save a private copy of the design in a lossless format. Then I would blur it very slightly and scale it down to 1500 pixels, using the best available scaling method (Gimp's default of linear interpolation should be changed to cubic interpolation), save it as PNG if it's a drawing, compress it further with pngcrush, and upload the resulting PNG file. For an example, compare the various revisions of Image:Logarithmic spiral.png. For function plots, I've automated this (see the script at Image:Gamma distribution.png). --MarkSweep 05:51, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Commons:Taxonomy | |||
| Hey there, I started a Taxonomy page on the commons to discuss the animal/plant gallery handling there. I thought you might be interested, so I left a note for you here. :-) --Conti|✉ 17:24, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Spelled/spelt etc. | |||
| Hi. I just thought that I'd say (as a cross between an apology and an excuse) that it's often very difficult for a British-English speaker to tell the difference between genuine U.S. English and mistakes that are commonly made by U.S. writers (and, I've no doubt, the same applies the other way round). I mean, the busines of colour/color, centre/center, lift/elevator, etc. — that's easy enough. But (as I've just been discussing with another user) there's a huge grey area. For example, I'm sometimes told that the use of 'disinterested' to mean 'uninterested' or 'alternate' to mean 'alternative' is genuine U.S. English — but then other people, such as my U.S. colleagues, assure me that it isn't, it's just that a lot of Americans make those mistakes. Do So (doh!) when I come across what I'd normally think of as a spelling or grammar mistake, I have to try to work out what its status. And sometimes I get it wrong. I had no idea until someone made the same point on another article that 'spelled' was U.S. English (I corrected it automatically, as one would correct 'kneeled' to 'knelt'). I won't do it again... Yours was a neat solution, though. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:12, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Pardon me for butting in, but as a British-English speaker who's had a lot more exposure to written American than to written British English, and who is alternately amused and appalled by the concern over alleged American adulteration of "the language" that is expressed by otherwise sane British people, I have an interest. But I'm disinterested. Where was I? Right, the question was of "disinterested" and the like. Perhaps the simplest solution is to get a couple of good, recent dictionaries, one British, one American, making sure that these have not been influenced by soi-disant "language mavens". (If I remember right, some "American Heritage" dictionary has little comments by "experts". Avoid!) There's a splendid little book titled American Tongue and Cheek that can be picked up used for peanuts and that destroys a lot of the myths propagated by the "mavens". As for "disinterested", its use to mean something rather like "bored" is old in Britain as well as the US; I think this is rather a pity as "uninterested" does this well, and it's convenient to have to single word that unambiguously means "not gaining personally from any decision on". But there's no point making an issue out of this: I only use "disinterested" with the latter meaning, but I don't touch others' use of it with the former meaning. Sorry to go off at a tangent, but for the rare well-informed view on issues (or non-issues) of "good English", see Geoff Pullum: this (on singular "they") is a superb appetizer. -- Hoary 22:48, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC) | |||
| Hi Mel, I like your nick, very clever. Hey Hoary, thanks for stopping by! Yes, the two Geoffs, Pullum and Nunberg, are among the few voices of sanity in this whole mess. | |||
| I don't know of any good recent American dictionaries that would be comparable to the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary in terms of being thoroughly grounded in reality. My own view on matters of orthography is that in many cases it is possible to simply avoid using words and expressions that would be somewhat puzzling to a sizable group of people. Of course it's not always possible to find good workarounds: I wouldn't advocate the exclusive use of "hue" instead of colo(u)r, or "dissect" instead of "analye", "unconcerned"/"unbiased" instead of "disinterested", etc. It would be interesting to see if an article could be completely rewritten to avoid all of these forms while still sounding natural. --MarkSweep 02:26, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| (I'm having this discussion in parallel, prompted by exactly the same issue in both cases — purely coincidentally.) Interestingly I'd thought that 'analyze' (like 'compromize' or 'surprize') was a misspelling on both sides of the Atlantic (it's a back-formation from 'analysis', after all), so it's another example of a correction I'd have made automatically, not thinking that it was a U.S./U.K. matter. (Is 'disect'–'dissect' another, or was that a typo?) | |||
| That was a genuine typo, now corrected. | |||
| I once received an e-mail (nothing to do with Misplaced Pages) from someone who was angrily protesting at my comment that philosophy should be done disinterestedly and dispassionately... | |||
| I see. "No, philosophy should be done passionately…" | |||
| The problem with work-arounds is that either they (as with the 'hue' example) use literary words to replace everyday words, or (as with 'dissect' for 'analyse', or 'unconcerned' and 'disintersted') they're not fully synonymous. Indeed, English is unusual among European languages in having very few genuine synonyms, which is part of the reason that (again, unusually for a European language) elegant variation is frowned upon. | |||
| I don't think that's true. I doubt that French has more true synonyms than English for example. | |||
| Finally, with regard to Hoary's point, the fact that a usage can be found in older English isn't enough to demonstrate correctness — otherwise we'd have to accept people using 'silly' to mean 'holy', and 'nunnery' to mean 'brothel'... Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:03, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Regarding "analyze", you at least have to admit that the AE convention results in less ambiguity. In BE orthography, "analyses" is ambiguous, and can either correspond to AE "analyses" (plural of "analysis") or to AE "analyzes" (3rd person singular form of "to analyze"). | |||
| I think Hoary's point was only that "disinterested" has a long history of its own and can traditionally mean two different things. It appears that one of those meanings is gradually falling out of use and is no longer understood by a growing number of people. --MarkSweep 09:26, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| But if it can be shown that older usages have continued (despite complaints to the contrary), this might be an additional argument for correctness. -- Hoary 09:11, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC) | |||
| Of course — but then you'd have evidence of recent accepted usage too, and wouldn't need to appeal to the older usage. Having said that, there are many other problems, not least being dialect. (I remember the first time I used the word 'mardy' after moving to London at the age of eighteen; I'd no idea that it wasn't standard English. I could have looked it up in a dictionary, of course, but children don't generally look up words that they know (unless they're rude words, of course; my image of the French was very peculiar for a long time after reading in an old French-English dictionary an illustrative use of the verb 'pisser': 'pisser au feu'). | |||
| When alternative forms exist side by side, they're often not geographical, though those who use one form or the other sometimes think that they are. And, of course, people often simply don't know that there are alternative spelings (on one page I've had one anonymous user repeatedly changing my use of 'artefact' to 'artifact', insisting (though not in so many words) that I'm illiterate). | |||
| Oh, by the way, 'mardy' isn't easily translated into standard English; someone who's mardy is a sulky spoilsport — at least, in Lincolnshire. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:22, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)Your continued donations keep Misplaced Pages running! | |||
| User talk:HerrGoebbles (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 01:49, 19 February 2006 TastyCakes (Talk | contribs) User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message ← Older edit Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 HerrGoebbles (Talk | contribs) ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE Newer edit → Line 37: Line 37: | |||
| :One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) :One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + == ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE == | |||
| + | |||
| + MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 Welcom wikipedia! | |||
| I kiss you!!! | |||
| Allahu Akbar! | |||
| Usammey 07:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for experimenting with Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Looper5920 07:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Contents 1 Hello 2 Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda 3 User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message 4 ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| Hello What a life!!! Sitting around and producing propaganda for the masses!!! I hope you enjoy your hobby. You know controlling information is but one step away from controlling peoples thought processes. With time and practice, you too will become a well versed student of revisionist history. | |||
| Here is to an exciting and wonderful future!!! | |||
| Herr Goebbles | |||
| Hello. Actually I don't consider the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on." to be very useful information. But if by "writing revisionist history" you mean deleting dumb ass comments by people like you, then yes it does give me a sort of sick satisfaction. Enjoy your brief window of not being banned. TastyCakes 07:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda Greetings, it is Germany 1939 all over again. Admin Mark Sweep and user TastyCakes conspire to silence another Misplaced Pages user that they find objectionable. After being called a "Dumb Ass" by user TastyCakes, and without any warning, Admin Mark Sweep, a former US Marine, has used his abilities as an admin to infinitely block my user priviledges. And all based on his personal dislike of my username, and his comradeship with user TastyCakes who were offended by a few harmless WORDS!!! Welcome to the world of those few who are endowed with superior genetics, and the ability to control what we read and learn!!! | |||
| HerrGoebbles | |||
| I'm not offended by your words, I just don't think they should be in Misplaced Pages because they suck. And apparently I'm not alone. Take care, TastyCakes 00:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message Greetings All!!! | |||
| Once again, the user TastyCakes showcases her superior intellect and reasoning in her response. Had TastyCakes followed the history of the original edits to US History and Expansion, TastyCakes would have seen that HerrGoebbles was only trying to add new information regarding the brutal consequences of US government sanctioned practices, which are clearly stated at the US Department of State website under: "Indian Treaties and the Removal act of 1830". Instead, user TastyCakes and an admin MarkSweep took it upon themselves to block user HerrGoebbles with absolutely no warning. This seems to be an accepted practice on Misplaced Pages embraced by a few users and Admins who wish to control and block any possibility of discussion about reality. | |||
| Welcome to The New World!!! | |||
| HerrGoebbles | |||
| One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| HerrGoebbles | |||
| Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:HerrGoebbles" ViewsUser page Discussion View source History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation Main Page Community Portal Current events Recent changes Random article Help Contact Misplaced Pages Donations Search | |||
| Toolbox | |||
| What links here Related changes User contributions Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link | |||
| Privacy policy About Misplaced Pages Disclaimers | |||
| Template:TAL episode | |||
| (posted to User_talk:Leif) Hi Leif, I noticed that you reverted the TAL episode template to re-enable the external links. I don't disagree with that revert at all, I'd just like to give you a quick run-down of what happened and why they were disabled. Recently, list of This American Life episodes was listed on VfD. The decision was to keep it, but enough people felt that the article was no good with the external links enabled. I personally don't see how that comes into play (as I see it, if this episode list is deemed encyclopedic, adding information such as external links can only enrich the article, not render it unencyclopedic). In order to address some of the concerns expressed during the VfD, I refactored the episode list to use the newly created TAL episode template and disabled the external links. I don't know what's going to happen next, maybe someone will nominate the episode list again for deletion. Anyway, just a quick heads up, no further action required for now. Cheers, --MarkSweep 03:35, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I was actually the person who nominated the article for VfD. I didn't see anyone who said the article would be worth keeping if only the links were disabled and instructions for linking were added to the article. Saying that the article should be deleted "because it is just a list of links" is not the same as saying the article should be kept but the links should be disabled. Now that there are a few details about some episodes, there is more reason to keep the list (and of course, the majority of keep votes is reason enough). Disabling the links was completely pointless and I don't think it made the article any more keepable in anybody's view. ~leif ☺ HELO 03:49, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| PRC, ROC, mainland China, Taiwan, etc. | |||
| Hello MarkSweep. Thank you for joining the discussion over the titles of China-related topics articles. Would you mind help explain to the contributors who opposed renaming because they thought the new titles are confusing, that how these terms differ from each other, and how the choice of one of these terms as a title is important. Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 18:04, Feb 19 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I think that this whole controversy is indicative of a general problem of insufficient separation between policy and conventions on the one hand, and the implementation of these policies on the other. Based on the naming conventions, it is perfectly clear what each article should be called. However, some people oppose the moves because they are not familiar with the naming conventions, or because they disagree with them. This leads to pointless discussions when the main objective is to implement the policies. I'm not suggesting that the policies should be set in stone, clearly those should be up to debate. But we can't keep reopening the same discussion every time a change mandated by a policy is proposed. In the cases at hand, the question should simply be "according to the current naming conventions, what are the most appropriate names for these articles?". Personal opinion beyond the scope of these conventions should play no role, so if someone disagrees with the move, they should participate in the discussion of the naming conventions. In any case, a clear distinction between setting policy and implementing existing policies should be drawn, so that we don't have to revisit the same issues over and over. --MarkSweep 02:48, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| In fact some who opposed the moves have already proceeded to discuss the naming conventions itself. Curps has even edited the naming conventions, although being reverted. | |||
| It has become not only a matter of naming conventions, but a choice between familiarity and accuracy. Those who opposed at WP:RM probably also oppose the current naming conventions, and not follow it when they create new pages. | |||
| Thanks again for the helpful inputs. :-) — Instantnood 09:45, Feb 20 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It should be simple: every article should have an accurate title. If familiarity is an issue, it can be addressed by adding a redirect. (But in some cases this won't work: history of Taiwan is obviously different from history of the Republic of China, and neither can be simply redirected to the other.) In related news, there was a recent discussion on Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom#Suggested_page_titles of a similar nature, where someone suggested renaming that article into something "simpler", even though the result would have been less accurate and would have been inconsistent with the naming conventions for monarchs. I think all of this indicates that to the extent that naming convnetions and editorial policies are desirable, there should be a centralized discussion and separate implementation of those policies without having to go through the arguments for the conventions again each time they are implemented. --MarkSweep 09:56, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| What makes the situation more complicated is that everybody knows the current Queen of the UK (or "the Queen") is "Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom" with little objection, which is not the case for "Republic of China", a name many people have never heard about. The current discussion and vote can perhaps be the foundation for later moves, avoiding lengthy discussion again each time. — Instantnood 10:16, Feb 20 2005 (UTC) | |||
| And interestingly the results so far for X in the People's Republic of China → X in China and Politics of Taiwan → Politics of the Republic of China contradicts. — Instantnood 10:35, Feb 20 2005 (UTC) | |||
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| Hello MarkSweep. The vote and discussion at Misplaced Pages:Requested moves#Economy of Taiwan → Economy of the Republic of China is getting messy. — Instantnood 12:30 Feb 28 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Image deletion | |||
| Greetings! Over at the Commons, some images I've uploaded are being considered for deletion. I'd be interested in hearing your honest opinion on the matter there. Thanks! – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 13:07, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| RfC | |||
| Hello there. I am recently being listed on RfC. Feel free to comment as you wish to. I regard it as a way out and to have the matter settled. Thanks. — Instantnood 18:07 Mar 1 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you very much MarkSweep. I am still a newbie to Misplaced Pages, and I did not expect some of the actions would have catched fire in this way. There are still a lot to do to build Misplaced Pages a better encyclopedia. | |||
| If you don't mind and are interested, please also take a look at Talk:Hong Kong, Talk:Victoria City, Talk:Cathay Pacific destinations, User talk:Huaiwei, Talk:List of city listings by country (and its archive), Talk:List of cities by country, Talk:List of countries that only border one other country, Talk:List of roads and highways and Talk:List of cities in China, and the edit histories of the articles. I am also discussing with Grutness and trying to resolve the stub sorting trouble at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Stub sorting/Criteria#The China-Taiwan mess. | |||
| Once again thanks for your help. Seems like I am always coming to you and ask for comments. :-P — Instantnood 00:54 Mar 2 2005 (UTC) | |||
| The sharing at RfC seems to be over. I have made a response there. Please take a look. I do hope that with everyone's effort Misplaced Pages will soon be the best encyclopedia ever. :-D — Instantnood 21:23 Mar 5 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Deleting Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png | |||
| I put Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png up for WP:IFD since I obsoleted it with Image:Normal distribtion cdf.png. Cburnett 03:52, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| In that case I'll have to recreate your image, because it's not antialiased. And BTW, you can use the "norm" function in gnuplot. --MarkSweep 03:56, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| OK, awesome. I'm trying to use your gnuplot to redo the expo distribution plots but I can't get it converted to png. I used the script on Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png to no avail (I get a segfault on pnmrotate!). Is that the same script you're using? Cburnett 05:17, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Actually, what I've been doing lately is the following: | |||
| Create PS output with gnuplot (the main reason is that you can use the Postscript Symbol font and it has some support for subscripts and superscripts). | |||
| Open the PS output in Gimp at high resolution (3000 by 4000 pixels or larger). (Update: I've been using 600 dpi recently, which results in images of about 4500 by 6000 pixels.) | |||
| Blur the image slightly. (Gaussian blur, 5 pixel radius.) | |||
| Dilate. | |||
| Autocrop. | |||
| Scale down to 960 by 720. 1300 by 975 | |||
| There must be is a way to automate that and to run Gimp in batch mode, but I haven't played with it yet. I don't use the old script anymore, because it leaves too much space around the figures. I could gradually (re-)create all of these plots in the same style (and perhaps upload them to the Commons instead), starting this weekend. --MarkSweep 06:58, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| "Mainland China" in titles | |||
| Hello. I have proposed at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) to change the title of some articles and categories. Would you be interested to join the discussion and say something? — Instantnood 20:26, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hello again MarkSweep. Can you come and say something? Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 15:01, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Template:deletebecauseoncommons | |||
| Agreed, there are some issues here. I only used it for images I uploaded myself, as well as a few with no history that I had no qualms about uploading, all {{trainweb}} images. --SPUI (talk) 22:12, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Gnuplot | |||
| I really like Image:Normal distribution cdf.png. Where can I learn to do that? This is the best I could figure out: Image:Dba plot.png - Omegatron 01:14, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| The trick is oversampling: use Gnuplot/Gimp to create an image several times larger than the size that you intend to upload, optionally blur it slightly, then scale it down to the desired size (which may have to be scaled down further for use in articles). I would strongly recommend using the PostScript output ("terminal") setting of gnuplot, since it has the most features (plus you can edit the generated PostScript code if necessary), then open the .ps file in Gimp at a high resolution (I use 500dpi or at least 3000 by 4000 pixels for the image dimensions). Some of the steps for the PDF/CDF plots are described a few entries further up on this talk page. I can plot the dba function for you, but I would like to do it directly in gnuplot, if possible. My understanding of maxima is limited, as I've only started using it recently: so H is (the real part?) of a (complex?) rational function. But what does db() do? I can't find it in the maxima documentation. Could you write down the definition of H in Mathematica notation? --MarkSweep 03:43, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| oops. db() is my own function... i'll have to fix that. - Omegatron 05:46, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Is db(x) = 20 log10(x)? --MarkSweep 08:50, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Does the following gnuplot code work? | |||
| kA = 7.397057228624818216e9 | |||
| H(s) = kA*s**4 / ((s+129.4)**2 * (s+676.7) * (s+4636) * (s+76655)**2) | |||
| dba(f) = 20 * log10(abs(H(2 * {0.0,1.0} * pi * f))) | |||
| set grid | |||
| set logscale x 10 | |||
| set xlabel "Frequency (Hz)" | |||
| set ylabel "Gain (dB)" | |||
| plot (x>2e4)? 0/0 : dba(x) lt 3 notitle | |||
| If it works, it's fairly easy to generate smooth PNG output via PostScript. --MarkSweep 09:19, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Excellent fix! Thanks! - Omegatron 16:51, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Proposed reorganization of Taiwan | |||
| Someone proposed something at Talk:Taiwan#Proposal_for_New_Organization_.283.2F19.2F2005.29.2C_Please_Comment, if you would take a look and comment....--Jiang 01:10, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| The proposed resolution to the RFC arising from the Sollog page | |||
| In essence I agree with the resolution - especially since my posts elsewhere are now being trashed on the RFC pages. But surely, just as people tracked down the Sollog sockpuppets, so Wikipedians will track down my IP and start all over again? The Number 01:57, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I replied on your talk page. --MarkSweep 00:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Patent template | |||
| Template:US patent is a neat idea, thanks. — Matt Crypto 10:10, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I'm glad you like it. --MarkSweep 00:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Cauchy Distribution graphic | |||
| Ha! Another picture person. Excellent job on the Cauchy distribution graphics. PAR 00:45, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Cburnett and I have started to systematically (re-)generate all existing distribution plots and upload them to the Commons. I might eventually get to the Lévy distribution too, but have been putting it off because it requires writing C code. --MarkSweep 00:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Can I ask you to keep putting it off? I would like to try to generate them, while trying to conform to the look that you have on the ones you generated. I'll play around with it, trying to get the look, and let you know when I upload something to Levy, then let me know what you think. Also, I didn't generate those point-by-point, I just took the FFT of the discretized characteristic function, which makes things simpler. PAR 01:33, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Sure, nothing easier than putting things off. ;-) --MarkSweep 01:51, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hi - can you tell me what font you are using for your standardized plots? PAR 03:39, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It's Times (standard PostScript font), because it matches the PostScript Symbol font. You can find the gnuplot source code for the plots e.g. at Commons:Image:Cauchy distribution pdf.png. It's best to use the enhanced PostScript backend of gnuplot, because it's the most flexible. Once I have the .ps file, I open it in Gimp. The remaining steps in Gimp are described above on this talk page. I'd be happy to help out, if necessary. Cheers, --MarkSweep 04:57, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I finished the Levy distribution plot, but haven't had time to do the infobox. Could you check it for consistency with your plots before I start churning these out for a few more distributions? Thanks - PAR 07:21, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Sorry, didn't see this in time. Your Levy plot is excellent: smooth, without appearing fuzzy or blurred. --MarkSweep 02:05, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Your vote is needed! | |||
| Hello MarkSweep. Despite the ongoing discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) over the use of the terms "mainland China" and "People's Republic of China", SchmuckyTheCat and Huaiwei have listed category:Cities in mainland China, category:Companies of mainland China and category:Laws of mainland China onto Misplaced Pages:Categories for deletion. | |||
| Your vote is now essential and vital for the survival of these categories, and to avoid attempts to bar the Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Chinese) from truly enforced. — Instantnood 20:44, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Update: there's also a poll at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese). — Instantnood 01:02, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks MarkSweep. — Instantnood 02:27, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Arbitration | |||
| Hello MarkSweep. I've got listed onto requests for arbitration by SchmuckyTheCat. Could you have a look? Thanks. — Instantnood 04:29, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Re: Template:Isd | |||
| Hi MarkSweep, | |||
| Thanks for your message, Template:Isd has been restored. My apologies for deleting it in error. I just started out in the cleaning department. :) | |||
| - Mailer Diablo 22:50, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| No problem. Thanks for restoring it. --MarkSweep 20:50, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks Mark for helping on the "Junkyard" Article! | |||
| Hey dude, you do a great job, please can you help on the Junkyard (disamiwhateveration) and Junkyard (band) formatting/configuration, so it looks acceptable, Thanks again, TJ (this stands for "Terrible Joe") | |||
| Unverified orphans | |||
| This is regarding your comments at Misplaced Pages talk:Images and media for deletion/Unverified orphans#So what do we do about those UOs? Request for comments.. Please note that there are many UOs that satisfy one of more of the following: | |||
| They weren't orphaned to begin with and were removed from articles by people paranoid about copyrights. | |||
| They were uploaded before mid-2004 which is when people decided to include non-GFDL non-PD non-fair-use images. Long ago everything was GFDL or PD (we had to agree to GFDL-redistributability while uploading) and there was no requirement to tag, then fair-use came to be allowed and then came allowing other licenses and image-tagging. | |||
| Their uploaders have since left the project and hence can't be contacted for updating the image with licensing info. | |||
| They might be redundant images in an article, but may be useful as a commons resource on the subject. | |||
| Orphans don't load the image server since nearly nobody sees them. | |||
| Please see my messages here, here, here, here, and here and the meagre response I was able to get. | |||
| If you feel I am not a trusted person enough to be bothered about, you could see Jamesday's opinion on Misplaced Pages talk:Copyright violations on history pages and Anthere's opinion here, here and here and Sj's opinion here. | |||
| As you could see from my messages, I would like a proper place where many people discuss the current image deletion policy, but I don't know what to do. Thanks for any help. -- Paddu 08:53, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Please come and vote! | |||
| Following the long discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) regarding proper titling of ROC-/Taiwan-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here. Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thanks. — Instantnood 06:15, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| binomial (disambiguation) | |||
| Hello. | |||
| I think links to binomial (disambiguation) should usually be in a notice at the top of the article, saying | |||
| For other topics using the name "binomial", see binomial (disambiguation). | |||
| The "see also" list at the bottom should be for related topics, not for unrelated topics that happen to use the same word. Also, people who find the long article titled "bishop" when looking for an article about the chess pieces called "bishops" are not likely to scroll all the way to the bottom and find the notice about "other uses". Michael Hardy 20:43, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Good point. I see you already fixed the relevant cases. I was merely zapping double redirects without thinking. --MarkSweep 21:17, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Plea for help | |||
| Hi Mark, | |||
| sorry for asking you directly but I have again a color problem and I have to admit that I did not managed to fix this with Gimp. I tried to follow the advises you gave me, but it did not become better - I guess I need some more experience. If you have time and desire to fix this you might have a look at Featured_pictures_candidates/Image:EuropeanParliament.jpg. Tillea 21:14, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| RfA thanks | |||
| Thank you for the vote at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Henrygb2. It has made my week. --Henrygb 01:57, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You're welcome. Congratulations! --MarkSweep 23:43, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Help with inserting image from commons in wikipedia | |||
| Hi... I hope it isn't highly inappropriate to ask you personally. I uploaded an image to the Wikimedia commons, Commons:Image:Orphan-typesetting.png, to be used in article Orphan (typesetting). For the life of me, I cannot figure out how to make it display in the article!! Can you please help me? Thanks, Smooth Henry 23:20, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC). | |||
| It's cool. I've added the image to the article for you. Have a look at the source – it works just like adding a local image. I've also changed the PD-US tag on the Commons: if you created the image yourself (which I assume is the case here) and want to release it into the public domain, you can use the {{PD-user|Smoothhenry}} license tag. Cheers, --MarkSweep 23:40, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hah. It never even occured to me that it would be that easy... Thanks a lot! --Smooth Henry 18:30, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| "China"/"PRC" vs. "mainland China" for page titles | |||
| Following the long discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) regarding proper titling of Mainland China-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here. Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thank you. — Instantnood 12:49, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I need your help | |||
| Hello MarkSweep. A request for arbitration has been filed against me at WP:RFAr by Snowspinner as the AMA advocate for jguk. What do you think I can do? — Instantnood 20:44, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for your advice MarkSweep. I am seeking assistance from AMA, to have the case better handled. I'll take your advice, and I won't be hestitant to seek further assistance from you, say, making a statement or hunting for evidence, when it is necessary. Thanks again for your generous help. :-D — Instantnood 21:55, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Instantnood RFAr | |||
| Thanks for your comments and info on the case, I appreciate it. If you ever have anything else you think of feel free to let me know about it! --Wgfinley 03:33, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for your additional comments, I agree with your points and am going to be revising the response here shortly. --Wgfinley 23:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Roasted coffee | |||
| Hi Mark! I'm a bit annoyed you suppressed both the Featured Picture tag {{FeaturedPicture}} and the copyright license tag on this picture : http://commons.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Image:Roasted_coffee_beans.jpg&diff=0&oldid=85750 Is there something wrong with the picture? Are you the copyright holder? I'm mainly embarrassed because the picture still shows on Commons Featured pictures ... villy 18:55, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) (villy on the Cmmons) | |||
| I've replied at Commons:User talk:Aurevilly. --MarkSweep 22:06, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for your answer. I did not notice the actual chronology and yes, it is weird. I juts "reverted" to the last version ... villy 06:51, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Probably a software glitch. Perhaps we can ask a developer to look into this? --MarkSweep 06:53, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Re: Archiving | |||
| I intended to make the history of my talk page more easily located, by cutting the records according to archive pages. I have tried, say or even and it still works. Only urls using &diff=next or &diff=prev will stop working. I'm not sure if it is necessary to have things restored tho. — Instantnood 21:38, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Brilliant. I didn't realize those diffs would still work. But just to be safe, check with an admin and/or developer (perhaps on the #mediawiki channel) if restoring the talk page is recommended. --MarkSweep 21:43, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Commons vs Misplaced Pages question | |||
| Hi - I have a question - I uploaded a file to the commons named PlackianLocus.png. The image I was expecting to update has the same name but is in Misplaced Pages. The commons image does not replace the Misplaced Pages image in articles. Do you know the best way to get articles to access the new image? Thanks for any help - PAR 06:11, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You'll have to list the local picture for deletion (perhaps those cases qualify for speedy deletion now, but I'm not sure). Point out that an image of the same name exists on the Commons, which means that once the local image has been deleted, it will be transparently replaced by the version from the Commons. It's not possible to embed images from the Commons (or anywhere else) directly. The only way to embed a Commons image is to say ] where foo.jpg exists one the Commons but doesn't exist locally. If it exists locally, it will preempt the inclusion of the Commons image. --MarkSweep 19:10, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I was afraid of that. - Thanks for the help. PAR 22:25, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Misplaced Pages:Chinese naming controversy | |||
| Dunno if you have noticed there's another discussion at Misplaced Pages:Chinese naming controversy, started by Uncle Ed. Do take a look. :-D — Instantnood 14:42, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| If you can, please take a look at the accuracy dispute at Talk:Economy of China--Jiang 06:05, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Request for help | |||
| My User page keeps on getting vandalised. Under the 3-revert rule there is a limit as to how many times I can revert the vandalism. You are clearly buddy-buddy with one of the vandals, can you please exert some pressure....or does Misplaced Pages really consist of people who carry out such childish behaviour? | |||
| Sollogfan 11:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| There is no limit for vandalism....especially on your own talk page. Cburnett 14:32, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It must be noted that 'Sollogfan' is a sockpuppet account; the vandalism he refers to involves re-instating the 'sockpuppet' image.-Ashley Pomeroy 23:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It must be noted that .Ashley Pomeroyis telling (deliberate) untruths to justify his obsessive vandalism. He has not provided one iota of evidence that I am Sollog. Sollogfan 11:15, 13 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It should be noted that my account is NOT a {{sollog}} account. Do you even know what a {{sollog}} is? Sollogfan 11:58, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You vandalise my page and ignore Sweep - so I descend to your childish level. Sollogfan 11:58, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Without commenting on the substance of the alleged vandalism, whenever you're thinking that you need to stoop to someone else's "childish level", you are automatically wrong. Don't bite the bait, if you think that's what's going on. --MarkSweep 19:05, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| My page continues to be vandalised by Pomeroy. I have ignored it but it continues. I now expect you to reprimand me for simply doing to Pomeroy what he does to me - after all, unfairness is a by-word hereSollogfan 11:15, 13 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Interesting that when Sollogfan asked for help and complained about vandalism you waited and waited and then.......sent the bullying for arbitration because Sollogfan fought back! Incredible! The Number 13:02, 15 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Gamma & inv-gamma plots | |||
| Looking at commons:Image:Gamma distribution cdf.png, your gnuplot code uses this for the cdf: | |||
| pgamma(x, shape, rate) = (x<0)? 0 : igamma(shape, x*rate) | |||
| except the parameterization is the k/theta not alpha/beta so the cdf should be x/rate not x*rate (x/rate was my original code and x*rate was your fix). I don't understand how the k/theta notation works for the pdf but doesn't for the cdf. | |||
| I'm trying to generate an inverse-gamma cdf but can't get a cdf generated. Maybe the cdf is wrong. Cburnett 21:47, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You do realize that the function that actually gets plotted is f and not pgamma, right? Function f is defined as | |||
| f(x, k, t) = pgamma(x, k, 1.0/t) | |||
| The only reason the function is called pgamma is for compatibility with R. The gnuplot code is taken from a bigger gnuplot file I use that defines many pdfs and cdfs in a way that is as close to R as possible, for my own sanity. Notice that the third paramter of pgamma and dgamma is called "rate" and not "scale", just the way R does it. I think it was for this distribution that there was a problem at an earlier point with the pdf and cdf plots not matching, so I uploaded one gnuplot script with matching definitions and either the cdf part of the pdf part commented out. | |||
| Or did I just completely misunderstand your question? | |||
| Now for the inverse-gamma distribution, something is wrong in the current version of that article. Let me work on that and get back to you (on this talk page). --MarkSweep 22:03, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| DOH! I missed the reciprocal in f(). I'm quite certain that the inverse-gamma pdf is correct and I'm sure I got the cdf from the same source as the pdf so that should be correct as well. Cburnett 22:54, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Actually, the inverse-gamma cdf was wrong, at least according to the conventions for γ(a,z) and Γ(a,z) that are used in Misplaced Pages. The correct cdf (now fixed in the article) is as follows: | |||
| In other words, this is the upper incomplete gamma function (where the Gamma integral starts at β / x instead of at zero) divided by the complete Gamma function. This fraction is also known as the regularized upper incomplete Gamma function (but there is widespread confusion about the terminlogy). gnuplot implements the regularized lower incomplete Gamma function as igamma: | |||
| So the InvGamma pdf and cdf can be implemented in gnuplot as follows: | |||
| dinvgamma(x,a,b) = exp(a*log(b) - lgamma(a) - (a+1)*log(x) - b*1.0/x) | |||
| pinvgamma(x,a,b) = 1 - igamma(a, b*1.0/x) | |||
| I've plotted these and they seem to pass integration-by-eye. --MarkSweep 23:05, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks a lot! Got them uploaded now. Cburnett 23:27, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Cburnett's admin nomination | |||
| I was nominated for administrator and I'd like to hear your opinion at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Cburnett. Cburnett 07:23, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Please explain | |||
| I am really offended with your saying my revision to "blardy" made no sense. I just used a visual example which seemed far clearer to me than the first example. If I'm mistaken, that would be one thing, but I'm not. When blue is written in black print, it is antiblardy. When blue is written in blue print, it is blardy. So blardiness or antiblardiness are not inherent qualities of a word. What is the mistake in that?--The Dogandpony 01:11, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Your example made no sense to me precisely because you tossed in another dimension. The previous examples were about words and their conventional orthographic representations, which are still inherent properties of the words themselves, not of specific occurrences. A second objection is that "blue" may not appear blue everywhere – for example, if I'm reading the article in a text-based browser, the link will not necessarily be blue. This is very hard to fix. I thought about "italicized" vs. "italicized", but that runs into similar problems. The best I could think of vs. "CAPITALIZED" vs. "capitalized". But even if this second problem could be resolved, there is still the issue that you're talking about occurrences of words, not about words as abstract units. --MarkSweep 01:35, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Amicus curiosus brief | |||
| Did you mean Amicus Curiae Brief? — Xiong熊talk 04:34, 2005 Apr 26 (UTC) | |||
| Well, there is a link to amicus curiæ, but I was going for the idea of the curious bystander. Though I guess curiosus does not quite mean "curious". ;-) --MarkSweep 04:42, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Can you do something about 50Stars and the List of national flags article? I've exhaused my reverts for the day and posted everything that's I wanted to post on the talk page...and he's still reverting. --Jiang 04:29, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Rendering Math | |||
| Hi Mark - On both my machines, the \, works fine to force TeX to PNG. Could you do me a favor and check it again? Did you make sure it wasn't an old cached image or something? Thanks. PAR 05:25, 6 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It depends on your user preferences. I've set mine to "HTML if possible or else PNG" for editing, which results in \, being rendered as a space. --MarkSweep 06:30, 6 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hi Mark - I think the \! character is too strong - it makes "HTML if possible, else PNG" give PNG, and for somebody who prefers HTML and has chosen preference 3, thats bad. If you choose "HTML if very simple, else PNG" then the \, character will give PNG. Please look at User talk:Cburnett#Rendering Math | |||
| Now I'm confused: I thought you wanted to force PNG rendering in displayed formulas? Here's my current understanding of the situation: If you want to force PNG rendering, then use \!, because \, will not work for all settings. If you don't want PNG, then it's simple: don't add anything. But I must be missing something here. --MarkSweep 16:58, 6 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| My current understanding of what I want is:) | |||
| Preference = "Always render PNG"............................All inline=PNG, all displayed=PNG | |||
| Preference = "HTML if very simple, else PNG"........All inline=HTML, all displayed=PNG | |||
| Preference = "HTML if possible, else PNG"...............All inline=HTML, all displayed=HTML | |||
| Articles should be written to maximize the above. They probably cant always be written so that the above is completely true. When \, is added to a "simple" displayed formula, it goes from HTML to PNG under preference #2 but stays HTML under #3 which is good. When \! is added, it gets displayed as PNG even under #3 which is not good. PAR 18:54, 6 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I basically agree with you, but I don't think point 3 is realistic, simply because HTML rendering is too limited. Things like multiple subscripts or superscripts, continued fractions, under-braces, etc. cannot be rendered as HTML at all, or do not look intelligible when rendered as HTML. Also, most big formulas (big sum, product, integral signs, even fractions) look just plain ugly in HTML. Finally, there is the issue of consistency and control over fonts: if you have a kappa in a PNG formula and a kappa in an HTML formula, they look very different in my browser (in fact, I can't distinguish a kappa from a k at all in HTML, but that may just be my font choices). Anyway, for consistency and control over fonts (since you know PNG will use Computer Modern), PNG may be preferrable. Overall I don't see anything wrong with always forcing PNG rendering for certain displayed formulas. I thought that's what you wanted to do. --MarkSweep 19:16, 6 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Well, it was, but my thinking was clarified by reading the discussion between you and Cburnett. I just want us to get a semi-standard way of doing things so we don't waste time reverting each others edits, since we are working on some of the same stuff. How about: | |||
| Preference = "Always render PNG"............................All inline=PNG, all displayed=PNG | |||
| Preference = "HTML if very simple, else PNG"........All inline=HTML, all displayed=PNG | |||
| Preference = "HTML if possible, else PNG"...............All inline=HTML, all displayed=HTML | |||
| with the proviso that #3 can really look bad, and if it does, add a \! to force PNG under all circumstances. | |||
| If you agree with that, how about we run it by Cburnett and see what he thinks and then we can go back and edit the chi-square article? If we can agree on that article, I think we are good to go. PAR 20:18, 6 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| That sounds good. Let's work on getting the chi-square article into a format we are all happy with. I'm not going to edit it for the time being. If you think I went overboard with my latest changes a couple of days ago, feel free to revert. --MarkSweep 02:06, 7 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:MarkSweep/archive2" | |||
| ViewsUser page Discussion Edit this page + History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation | |||
| Main Page | |||
| Community Portal | |||
| Current events | |||
| Recent changes | |||
| Random article | |||
| Help | |||
| Contact Misplaced Pages | |||
| Donations | |||
| Search | |||
| Toolbox | |||
| What links here | |||
| Related changes | |||
| Upload file | |||
| Special pages | |||
| Printable version | |||
| Permanent link | |||
| This page was last modified 19:37, 22 February 2006. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details). | |||
| Misplaced Pages® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. | |||
| Privacy policy About Misplaced Pages Disclaimers | |||
| Your continued donations keep Misplaced Pages running! | |||
| User talk:MarkSweep/archive5 | |||
| < User talk:MarkSweep | |||
| Jump to: navigation, search | |||
| Contents | |||
| 1 AI Arbitration case | |||
| 2 Uh oh | |||
| 3 Review | |||
| 4 Vandalims | |||
| 5 Restoration request | |||
| 6 Vandal watch | |||
| 7 Thanks -- Endowment | |||
| 8 Curps-like accounts.... | |||
| 9 Underlining section headings | |||
| 10 Signature glyph | |||
| 11 210.8.54.34 | |||
| 12 The Second Law Vandal | |||
| 13 Rome | |||
| 14 More Rome | |||
| 15 Stability (probability) | |||
| 16 Query on how to block | |||
| 17 Time to press on | |||
| 18 Clean-up of Bayes' Theorem talk | |||
| 19 Left you some messages | |||
| 20 de-spam | |||
| 21 FakeName | |||
| 22 Image:2005-0208dwarf-full.jpg | |||
| 23 Bot disambiguation of "continuous" | |||
| 24 Republic of China | |||
| 25 User:LettuceSalad | |||
| 26 Sleeper accounts | |||
| 27 JIT compilation | |||
| 28 Cultures of the World | |||
| 29 Hi Mark, please help | |||
| 30 Transportation in Taiwan deserves a separate article | |||
| 31 Re: ROC vs. Taiwan | |||
| 32 Re: Transport articles | |||
| 33 Newspapers used instead of blogs | |||
| 34 Re: Category:Ancient peoples of China | |||
| AI Arbitration case | |||
| The Arbitration case against AI has closed. Given that you brought it, I thought you might be interested. The results include AI being banned until the legal dispute is resolved. | |||
| Yours, | |||
| James F. (talk) 01:03, 29 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Uh oh | |||
| Hey MarkSweep, User:Viriditas has called me a troll . Could you have a look? Thanks. Wyss 12:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Oops, didn't see this in time. Looks like you guys got it sorted out now. Cheers, --MarkSweep✍ 05:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Review | |||
| Hello Mark I'd like to know if you would be interested to take a look at my proposal to rewrite the mainland China article, at my sandbox, which was written based on user:Alassius' proposal and the discussion at talk:mainland China. Thanks. :-) — Instantnood 18:20, 3 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Vandalims | |||
| I would like to report, that User:Instantnood has taken to vandalism to archieve his aims. In Hong Kong national football team, he tried to speed delete it dispite the fact that it fails to meet any criteria for speedy deletion, and has taken to constantly reverting that notice after my removal of it.--Huaiwei 11:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Restoration request | |||
| User:SchmuckyTheCat and user:Huaiwei has attempted to move the article on Hong Kong's football team from the title Hong Kong national football team to Hong Kong Representative Team, saying that the team is not a national team , with the word "national" defined in their way(s). User:Huaiwei first moved the article to Hong Kong Representative Team, and then moved it again to Hong Kong representative football team (edit · talk · links · history · watch) . It made the original title Hong Kong national football team (edit · talk · links · history · watch) a double redirect, and he fixed the double redirect , thus creating edit history. Since the original title is no longer a pure redirect with no other edit history, it is impossible to restore the content under the original title. I demanded for formal procedure, that is, to request the move at WP:RM. To do this, I tagged the original title as speedy (with {{deletebecause}}), so that article can be restored under the original title. Huaiwei objected this , and labelled me as vandalism . Would you mind look into what had happened, and help restore the content under the original title, so that the move can be discussed through formal procedures? Thank you. — Instantnood 13:04, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| User:Instantnood incorrectly said my renaming of the article was due to me saying it is "not a national team". My effort was based on the fact that the Hong Kong Football Association refers to it as such . The usage by HKFA as the official body overseeing the team should take precedence over all other uses. Taking a redirect for speedy delete means it must fulfill the relevant criteria for speedy deletion. Failing to do so contravenes wikipolicy, and his insistance on restoring the request even after repeated warnings amounts to vandalism.--Huaiwei 13:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I understand this is not the place for me to have a dialogue with Huaiwei. But since he has raised some evidence to back himself, instead of providing a full picture, I have to provide some additional information for your decision. | |||
| The Hong Kong Football Association also calls other national teams "representative teams", for instance, Japan , since the teams are representing their countries. It is a conventions here that the HKFA calls its team "Olympics representative team", "Asian Cup representative team", "World Cup representative team", etc., as the members of the team for each event is selected every time. The Olympics representative team and Asian Cup representative team are not compose of the same players. | |||
| Other evidence I have mentioned in the speedy deletion request was that China Daily , InvestHK , BBC Sport , HKFA and Man Utd are all calling it "Hong Kong national team". | |||
| Since the move is debatable, I would like to request you to restore it as it was, so as to allow a formal move request be filed, and the move be discussed. Thanks. — Instantnood 13:33, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I provide whatever information I happen to be aware of. Is the team mentioned in Japan's national team? The JFA refers to its teams specifically as national teams . The HKFA does not, and probably for good reason.--Huaiwei 13:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I'm the one that first moved it to Hong Kong Representative Team, not Huaiwei. In fact, I moved three teams, HK, Macau, and Guam. I first researched the teams associations to see if they had a preferred name. HKFA does have a preferred name, either Hong Kong Representative Team or sometimes Team Hong Kong. I did this because a year or so ago, it appears that some football fans took some initiative (and good on them for it) and made template titled and formed articles for every team in FIFA. Unfortunately, they named every team "national" if it didn't already have an article. In any case, I moved HK to it's associations preferred name, and Macau and Guam to "regional". | |||
| I tell you this so that you don't think I made a bunch of unresearched and reflexive moves. In Macau's case, I also removed POV statements to the effect of "they suck". When 'nood instinctively reverted, he didn't bother to fix statements such as these either. He is so busy restoring and focusing on maintaining "national" that he's also removing constructive edits. | |||
| There certainly aren't any "squatters rights" to keep an obviously incorrect name. Let 'nood put it on wp:rm for discussion if he wants them moved back. SchmuckyTheCat 15:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I've fixed the double redirect and would advise you to discuss any further moves on the talk page of the new article and to leave a note on WP:RM. For better or for worse, Misplaced Pages encourages you to be bold. In this case, if someone moves an article and the move was not done in bad faith, I see no reason to undo it. You're more than welcome to discuss whether the article should be moved back to its former title. The redirects should stay, because they are currently in use and they also help readers locate the article. Regardless of my opinion on their current usefulness, I don't see how the redirects would qualify as speedy deletion candidates. On a general note, I don't think there is any point in labeling each other's edits as "vandalism" etc.: it's clear that there is an underlying substantive debate and disagreement, which you're encouraged to resolve by discussion. Real vandalism, to me, is mostly of the "Bozo wuz here LOL!!11111" kind. The edits you call "vandalism" are just indications that the disagreement is not being resolved by debate. If you cannot decide amongst yourselves, then start an RfC and ask for more input on this issue. For what it's worth, I personally don't have strong feelings about either title, they both seem basically Ok to me. Cheers, --MarkSweep✍ 18:04, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks so much Mark. In fact in the past I have been using {{deletebecause}} when the destination is occupied in a move (for instance: Mister Softee and KCR Light Rail), either because of cut-and-paste moves, or duplicate articles at destinations. It has been alright and that's basically what I was doing for these articles on football teams: to restore the articles back to the original titles, and to move forward to initiate a move request discussion. You're most welcome to take part in future discussions on the move requests. Thanks again for your kind attention, Mark. — Instantnood 18:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Vandal watch | |||
| Mark, would you please put your extra pair of eyes on Schnorrer. Feel free to block on sight the user accounts that blank the dab notice at the top of the page. SchmuckyTheCat 22:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I've added it to my watchlist. The article is currently protected, and I'll watch out for further activity once it gets unlocked. The dab notice is very useful indeed, because people who don't know about umlauts or can't easily enter them in the search box will end up at this article. I can also see why someone may have a problem with the presence of the dab notice, but its overall usefulness far outweighs any perceived smear due to its presence. The silly vandalism and sockpuppetry clearly have to stop too. --MarkSweep✍ 00:47, 6 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks -- Endowment | |||
| Thanks for your edits to the endowment page. --zephern | |||
| Curps-like accounts.... | |||
| ....have all already been username blocked by a bot written by Curps. Just to save you some time! -Splashtalk 03:03, 14 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Underlining section headings | |||
| I'm just a Wilkipedian newbie, so go easy... P=) | |||
| Is it a firm Wilkipedian style no-no to underline the section headings, or does it depend on the page? I just think it looks neater with the underlines. | |||
| Also, I notice most headings are "== Title ==", but some are "==Title==": Shouldn't they all be "== Title =="? ~Kaimbridge~ 00:15, 16 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Whoops, I didn't see your message to me! ~Kaimbridge~ 00:20, 16 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Signature glyph | |||
| Please could you put {{unicode}} around the very pretty glyph in your signature? I can't see it otherwise, and I suspect nor can a whole load of others. (FYI that's a very cheap template, but maybe you might like to copy in the raw code?) HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 09:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| How about this: longer signature, but only ASCII characters? --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:41, 26 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| More legible but nowhere near so pretty (can you tell I preferred the old one? :-). Cheers. —Phil | Talk 16:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| 210.8.54.34 | |||
| I blocked the IP right before you cleared WP:AIV, but now I think I may have been misreading timestamps earlier on the warnings. I don't see much evidence of good-faith contributions, and think the IP has been generously warned already, but should I unblock? Sorry, I'm a little new at this. — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 05:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I'm a bit torn: on the one hand, the IP has few, if any, good contributions; on the other hand, we don't want to punish good behavior (like desisting when warned). Let's leave it blocked for a while, I might unblock later. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 05:13, 10 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Ok, sorry for the over-enthusiasm on my part. Part of the problem was my local time offset (I'm contributing from Japan); I've reset my preferences to accord with the server time, for simplicity's sake, in the future. I set the block for a week based on Essay's last block, and the fact that all the diffs I sampled appeared to be vandalism. If you want to let them off after 24 hours or so, I'll defer to you, though I expect it will only serve as a temporary reprieve. Thanks, — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 05:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| The Second Law Vandal | |||
| Hi MarkSweep - some anon user is using multiple IP's to insert the same nonsense into the second law of thermodynamics article. This person does not respond to repeated requests to discuss the situation, and reverts every time someone fixes the problem. List of IP's from which this vandalism originates: | |||
| User:66.92.162.185 00:56 21 November 2005 | |||
| User:128.164.129.1 00:56 21 November 2005 | |||
| User:161.253.152.34 03:36, 21 November 2005 | |||
| User:66.92.162.133 10:07, 21 November 2005 | |||
| I have put Verror3 warnings on these IP's. Your help, as in the past, would be greatly appreciated. PAR 14:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Rome | |||
| Infobox is a great addition. | |||
| Some other things are a real mess - leading to either inconsistent information across the episodes, OR you're planning on ripping out information and comments in other episode pages. | |||
| See discussion for "How Titus Pullo Brought Down the Republic" | |||
| More Rome | |||
| I added an "abstract" to The Stolen Eagle of my own devising, just as a place holder for now - it's pretty rough - but it's 3am for me. | |||
| You've got a good eye for making screen captures for the episodes, btw. | |||
| Stability (probability) | |||
| Hi MarkSweep - I emptied that article User:PAR/Work7 because it was just a work page I used to develop the Stability (probability) article. Since I didn't know of any article that developed the idea of a location-scale family, I developed it in this article, but it was a step towards the main idea of the article, which was to discuss the stability of such a family. Maybe the development of the location-scale concept could be extracted from the article and put into the location-scale article, leaving a smaller section in the stability article? PAR 02:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Query on how to block | |||
| Hi, I just caught IP 213.249.155.237 vandalising at Comic book and Mary Shelley. He seems a persistent vandal User talk:213.249.155.237, can he be blocked without warning? If so, do I just got to Block user and enter the IP address and give a 24 hr block? Apologies, but I've not been an admin long and I just want to double check, and I noticed your name at Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism with a recent time stamp. Steve block talk 12:24, 2 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Cheers for that, I blocked the user for 3 hours. Steve block talk 12:40, 2 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Time to press on | |||
| Since the ArbCom case that I was involved has eventually been closed , I believe it's time to go forward on how the entire issue can be resolved. What do you think? Would centralised discussion be a good way? — Instantnood 18:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I would take it easy for now. Centralized discussion is only a good idea if there is a small set of simple questions that can be presented to, and adequately judged by, the larger community. I don't think we're at that stage yet. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Clean-up of Bayes' Theorem talk | |||
| I'm a little confused as to how you selected the "snide comments" to delete on the Talk:Bayes' theorem page. I recognise my comments were somewhat below the level of civility that I usually try to display, but they were not uncalled for. They were provoked by comments from Wile E. Heresiarch, such as these: | |||
| "I don't understand what's going on here, but I'll tell you what to do anyway" is a weak position to argue from, but you don't let that slow you down. I'm accustomed to arguing with people who know what they're talking about; I really don't know how to deal with you. | |||
| If you can't follow an argument of this kind, I have to wonder why you're editing this page. If you don't comprehend the different levels of exposition, you can't make a reasoned choice between them. | |||
| Those are clear attacks in my book. Yet you left them untouched in your clean-up efforts, when you went after the sarcastic replies Heresiarch earned for himself because of these. I would very much like to know how you drew the line between acceptable and unacceptable in this case. --Ritchy 19:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It's a matter of opinion, obviously. Some postings were more insulting than others. In this case, Wile said directly what he thought without the dripping sarcasm seen in other posts. I find that much less objectionable than some of the replies he got (not "earned"). --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Left you some messages | |||
| In case you're too busy editing to notice, I left you some messages in IRC. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| de-spam | |||
| Erm I guess even though you are probably 'pedantically' correct the links to product pages on some tea shops (reasonably) in the references on Lapsang souchong and lots of other pages are there because they seem to have come from good sources and not as spam. It is increddibly hard to find any other references and in some cases very difficult. Some shops cite that their information comes from certain experts they list. I dont really know how to resolve this, but pedantically going around and removing all the references to any tea shop is certainly not a good idea. Usually really real link spam on tea pages is easy to notice as people add stuff to references or external links without adding any content to the page... --Iateasquirrel 12:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It all started with me reverting what I thought were clear cases of link spam by Robi osahan (talk • contribs) and 216.99.210.13 (talk • contribs) (who are arguably the same person). In the end I also removed other links that pointed to commercial sites. Please restore if I went overboard. I personally think that websites with little substance beyond advertising blurb should not be linked from "External links". --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| FakeName | |||
| I am going to unblock FakeName. As he is not an administrator he cannot edit Alan Dershowitz anyway, but can communicate if he wishes on his talk page. A simple assertion that an article is defamatory is not a legal threat but information which is useful to us. Fred Bauder 17:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| No need. Jimbo already unblocked him. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 17:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Image:2005-0208dwarf-full.jpg | |||
| Please remember to notify the uploader when tagging images with "no license". Thue | talk 19:14, 10 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Bot disambiguation of "continuous" | |||
| Cheers.--Commander Keane 19:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Republic of China | |||
| I don't think your unexplained rv is good wiki practice at all. Please participate in the discussion and look at the actual changes (I am not merely reverting except for the last, where Jiang is). I am making substantive changes, while you are doing exactly what the spirit of forbidding 3 reverts is meant to prevent.Moveapage 19:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| User:LettuceSalad | |||
| Hi. If you are going to block User:LettuceSalad, you should notify the user. The talk page still says they won't be blocked until further vandalism. - Tεxτurε 19:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Dude, give a guy a minute to write something coherent when there isn't a convenient template for this situation. ;-) Consider it done. Cheers, --MarkSweep (call me collect) 19:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Coherent? Dang, I've never tried that! Um... how does it work? Oh! I know: {{coherent template}}- Tεxτurε 19:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Sleeper accounts | |||
| User:Cool_Cat_is_a_faggot needs blocking. | |||
| User:Cool_Cat_is_a_fat_fat needs blocking. | |||
| Thas all I got for now. --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Sorry I got confused between accounts these two need a blocking. --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I deleted those pages, since the accounts don't exist. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 20:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| They do EXIST, it is called a "sleeper" please BLOCK them. Thanks. --Cool CatTalk|@ 16:10, 15 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| My mistake I did not notice the "." on the real impostoration accounts (User:Cool_Cat_is_a_faggot., User:Cool_Cat_is_a_fat_fat.) sorry for waisting your time. :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 16:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| No problem, I've blocked them just now. A good way to make sure you got the account name right is to go to the user page and check if there is a "User contributions" link in the toolbox. Cheers, --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| JIT compilation | |||
| You wrote: compilation to native code irrelevant (besides, modern JVMs are often faster than native compilers). Please explain how the time taken by JIT is "irrelevant". It's not free, and it has to be done every time a class is loaded for the first time in a given JVM. – Smyth\talk 18:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You have to look at the diff. Here's what it used to say: | |||
| A number of language features unavoidably harm performance and memory usage, even if native compilation is used: | |||
| I changed this to: | |||
| A number of language features unavoidably harm performance: | |||
| I never said that the time taken by a compiler (be it JIT or offline) is irrelevant. The point of the paragraph was to say that the Java language has certain features or makes certain guarantees that could be seen to impose a performance penalty. The qualification "even if native compilation is used" is a strawman: the discussion is about language features, so they apply to all compilation and runtime models. In addition, offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM. So not only is the "even if" qualification irrelevant to the discussion of array bounds checking etc., it is also misleading because it falsely suggests that offline compilation is somehow less affected. The fact is that several things have to happen at runtime (array bounds checking, byte code verification and run-time type checking for dynamic loading), and this will be true no matter what the underlying compilation or execution model is. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 20:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Alright, but how can you say that "offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM"? – Smyth\talk 11:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Try it yourself. Take your favorite Java benchmark, compile it using GCJ or some other native compiler and compare that with running the bytecode on the 1.6 server VM (or even 1.5). Even if compiler technology improves, there's still a problem: separate offline compilation makes it hard to perform certain optimizations, like for example devirtualization. A JIT compiler has an inherent advantage there. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 22:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks. – Smyth\talk 13:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Cultures of the World | |||
| Would you consider contributing? Or how about voting for it as collaboration of the week for this new but important article.--Culturesoftheworld 19:31, 18 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hi Mark, please help | |||
| I would like to request your help with serious NPOV and verifiability problems on the Arabic numerals page. I have mentioned it, yet again, here Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette_alerts#December_17. Please help me recruit as many neutral and well-intending editors to the page to counter the strong and manifest bias. Regards, and thanks. csssclll (14:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC)) | |||
| Transportation in Taiwan deserves a separate article | |||
| see Talk:Transportation in the Republic of China. Please do not revert it without an explanation. | |||
| Re: ROC vs. Taiwan | |||
| I agree that we should have some naming convention notice for taiwan-related articles. This is already done for all Korea related articles. Unfortunatly, I'm out of town for the next week or so (on borrowed internet here) so my time online is severely limited. If you can, get started. or i'll look into it later. a good number of 163.28.64.50's do seem troubling. --Jiang 03:48, 23 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Re: Transport articles | |||
| I'm most happy to help, but I'm afraid I cannot manage to follow all these closely. :-| — Instantnood 20:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hello Mark. You may be interested to take a look at the CfD nomination of category:newspapers of the Republic of China. — Instantnood 18:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Should the matter be brought to the administrators' notice board? The community doesn't seem to be bothered with the NPOV policies. — Instantnood 17:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Newspapers used instead of blogs | |||
| I would like your feedback on the use of newspapers as a source instead of blogs. In the case of the Robert Clark Young article, I have found newspaper sources that cover much of the same material as the blogs that have been used in the article. When I replaced the blog sources with the newspaper sources, Alabamaboy reverted every single one of my edits. Also, very strangely, he accused me on the discussion page of being Mr. Young himself! | |||
| This is the Misplaced Pages Guideline I am trying to follow with my edits: | |||
| "Publications with teams of fact-checkers, reporters, editors, lawyers, and managers — like the New York Times or The Times of London — are likely to be reliable, and are regarded as reputable sources for the purposes of Misplaced Pages. At the other end of the reliability scale lie personal websites, weblogs (blogs), bulletin boards, and Usenet posts, which are not acceptable as sources." | |||
| Thus, I have replaced the blog sources with newspaper sources. Again, let me stress that this has not led to much change in the text of the article itself--what I'm trying to do here is change the nature of the sources so that they themselves comply with Misplaced Pages Guidelines. | |||
| Could Alabamaboy and I get some feedback on this? I wonder if you could go over to the Robert Clark Young history and compare both versions of the sourcing--the one using newspapers, and the one using blogs. Thank you. Berenise 01:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| First off, I apologize for Berenise's comment being spammed upon so many user's talk pages. However, since Berenise already placed it here I wanted you to be aware that there are three reasons the article was reverted: 1) Berenise made the changes despite a lack of consensus and my objections on the Talk:Robert Clark Young. In short, the online references are refered to in the newspaper and print articles, making the online sources primary sources. The article also has many print sources which complement and add to the online sources. 2) The edits made the article less NPOV b/c they removed opposing viewpoints. While these references may be online, they are from credible named sources who are considered experts in their respected areas. 3) There is a strong possibility that Berenise is Robert Clark Young. Young previously edited the article about himself and most of Berenise's edits since coming to Misplaced Pages have been to the Young article. I'm trying to clear this up with Berenise; once she proves she is not Young I'd love to get opinions from other editors about this situation. For full details, see Talk:Robert Clark Young.--Alabamaboy 01:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Re: Category:Ancient peoples of China | |||
| Thanks for the answer Mark. :-D — Instantnood 22:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Your continued donations keep Misplaced Pages running! User talk:MarkSweep/archive2 < User talk:MarkSweep (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 07:46, 18 May 2005 MarkSweep (Talk | contribs) archiving ← Older edit Current revision 66.142.56.31 (Talk | contribs) Spelled/spelt etc. | |||
| Line 33: Line 33: | |||
| :::::Of course — but then you'd have evidence of recent accepted usage too, and wouldn't need to appeal to the older usage. Having said that, there are many other problems, not least being dialect. (I remember the first time I used the word 'mardy' after moving to London at the age of eighteen; I'd no idea that it wasn't standard English. I could have looked it up in a dictionary, of course, but children don't generally look up words that they know (unless they're rude words, of course; my image of the French was very peculiar for a long time after reading in an old French-English dictionary an illustrative use of the verb 'pisser': 'pisser au feu'). :::::Of course — but then you'd have evidence of recent accepted usage too, and wouldn't need to appeal to the older usage. Having said that, there are many other problems, not least being dialect. (I remember the first time I used the word 'mardy' after moving to London at the age of eighteen; I'd no idea that it wasn't standard English. I could have looked it up in a dictionary, of course, but children don't generally look up words that they know (unless they're rude words, of course; my image of the French was very peculiar for a long time after reading in an old French-English dictionary an illustrative use of the verb 'pisser': 'pisser au feu'). | |||
| :::::When alternative forms exist side by side, they're often not geographical, though those who use one form or the other sometimes think that they are. And, of course, people often simply don't know that there are alternative spelings (on one page I've had one anonymous user repeatedly changing my use of 'artefact' to 'artifact', insisting (though not in so many words) that I'm illiterate). :::::When alternative forms exist side by side, they're often not geographical, though those who use one form or the other sometimes think that they are. And, of course, people often simply don't know that there are alternative spelings (on one page I've had one anonymous user repeatedly changing my use of 'artefact' to 'artifact', insisting (though not in so many words) that I'm illiterate). | |||
| - :::::Oh, by the way, 'mardy' isn't easily translated into standard English; someone who's mardy is a sulky spoilsport — at least, in Lincolnshire. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:22, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) + :::::Oh, by the way, 'mardy' isn't easily translated into standard English; someone who's mardy is a sulky spoilsport — at least, in Lincolnshire. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:22, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)Your continued donations keep Misplaced Pages running! | |||
| + User talk:HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + (Difference between revisions) | |||
| + Jump to: navigation, search | |||
| + Revision as of 01:49, 19 February 2006 | |||
| + TastyCakes (Talk | contribs) | |||
| + User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message | |||
| + ← Older edit Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 | |||
| + HerrGoebbles (Talk | contribs) | |||
| + ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| + Newer edit → | |||
| + Line 37: Line 37: | |||
| + | |||
| + :One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) :One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + + | |||
| + + == ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE == | |||
| + + | |||
| + + MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| + + | |||
| + + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| + | |||
| + Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 | |||
| + Welcom wikipedia! | |||
| + | |||
| + I kiss you!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + Allahu Akbar! | |||
| + | |||
| + Usammey 07:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + Thanks for experimenting with Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Looper5920 07:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + Contents | |||
| + 1 Hello | |||
| + 2 Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda | |||
| + 3 User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message | |||
| + 4 ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + Hello | |||
| + What a life!!! Sitting around and producing propaganda for the masses!!! I hope you enjoy your hobby. You know controlling information is but one step away from controlling peoples thought processes. With time and practice, you too will become a well versed student of revisionist history. | |||
| + | |||
| + Here is to an exciting and wonderful future!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + Herr Goebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + Hello. Actually I don't consider the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on." to be very useful information. But if by "writing revisionist history" you mean deleting dumb ass comments by people like you, then yes it does give me a sort of sick satisfaction. Enjoy your brief window of not being banned. TastyCakes 07:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda | |||
| + Greetings, it is Germany 1939 all over again. Admin Mark Sweep and user TastyCakes conspire to silence another Misplaced Pages user that they find objectionable. After being called a "Dumb Ass" by user TastyCakes, and without any warning, Admin Mark Sweep, a former US Marine, has used his abilities as an admin to infinitely block my user priviledges. And all based on his personal dislike of my username, and his comradeship with user TastyCakes who were offended by a few harmless WORDS!!! Welcome to the world of those few who are endowed with superior genetics, and the ability to control what we read and learn!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + I'm not offended by your words, I just don't think they should be in Misplaced Pages because they suck. And apparently I'm not alone. Take care, TastyCakes 00:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message | |||
| + Greetings All!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + Once again, the user TastyCakes showcases her superior intellect and reasoning in her response. Had TastyCakes followed the history of the original edits to US History and Expansion, TastyCakes would have seen that HerrGoebbles was only trying to add new information regarding the brutal consequences of US government sanctioned practices, which are clearly stated at the US Department of State website under: "Indian Treaties and the Removal act of 1830". Instead, user TastyCakes and an admin MarkSweep took it upon themselves to block user HerrGoebbles with absolutely no warning. This seems to be an accepted practice on Misplaced Pages embraced by a few users and Admins who wish to control and block any possibility of discussion about reality. | |||
| + | |||
| + Welcome to The New World!!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| + MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| + | |||
| + Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:HerrGoebbles" | |||
| + ViewsUser page Discussion View source History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation | |||
| + Main Page | |||
| + Community Portal | |||
| + Current events | |||
| + Recent changes | |||
| + Random article | |||
| + Help | |||
| + Contact Misplaced Pages | |||
| + Donations | |||
| + Search | |||
| + Toolbox | |||
| + What links here | |||
| + Related changes | |||
| + User contributions | |||
| + Upload file | |||
| + Special pages | |||
| + Printable version | |||
| + Permanent link | |||
| + | |||
| + Privacy policy About Misplaced Pages Disclaimers | |||
| + | |||
| ==Template:TAL episode== ==Template:TAL episode== | |||
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| Current revision Contents 1 Image:Spoon-lure.png 2 Commons:Taxonomy 3 Spelled/spelt etc. 4 Template:TAL episode 5 PRC, ROC, mainland China, Taiwan, etc. 6 Image deletion 7 RfC 8 Deleting Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png 9 "Mainland China" in titles 10 Template:deletebecauseoncommons 11 Gnuplot 12 Proposed reorganization of Taiwan 13 The proposed resolution to the RFC arising from the Sollog page 14 Patent template 15 Cauchy Distribution graphic 16 Your vote is needed! 17 Arbitration 18 Re: Template:Isd 19 Thanks Mark for helping on the "Junkyard" Article! 20 Unverified orphans 21 Please come and vote! 22 binomial (disambiguation) 23 Plea for help 24 RfA thanks 25 Help with inserting image from commons in wikipedia 26 "China"/"PRC" vs. "mainland China" for page titles 27 I need your help 28 Instantnood RFAr 29 Roasted coffee 30 Re: Archiving 31 Commons vs Misplaced Pages question 32 Misplaced Pages:Chinese naming controversy 33 Request for help 34 Gamma & inv-gamma plots 35 Cburnett's admin nomination 36 Please explain 37 Amicus curiosus brief 38 Rendering Math | |||
| Image:Spoon-lure.png Hi. You tagged this for cleanup. I've replaced it in the article (Spoon lure) with Image:SpoonLureWithCrosssection.png, which I drew from scratch. It's still kinda crude, but at least it's symmetrical (and more accurate from what I remember--it's been a long time since I've gone fishing). Is that the level of improvement you had in mind, or should I mark it for further cleanup? Niteowlneils 22:09, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks. I was hoping it could be redrawn in a vector graphics program like Inkscape, Ipe, or good old XFig. With transparent background and antialiasing. I've put up a request over at Misplaced Pages:Image recreation requests. --MarkSweep 01:55, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) OK. At least it's a better (IMHO, of course) placeholder until a more sophisticated one is developed. Anyway, it was only the third image I'd editted with any graphics program, and the first I started from scratch, so it was good practice. First was Image:SanJoseMapWithLAFCOandCityLabelsandCA.png--you can see what I started with at the top of the Stick Map section; second was removing the background clutter of Image:MeerkatAtHappyHollow.jpg and uploading to commons Commons:Image:MeerkatAtHappyHollow.jpg. How about Image:Hammersmith and city line.png on commons to replace the one on en:? Most everything but Plaistow seems legible now. I think to get any better it would have to be changed to a vertical orientation, which would also have the advantage of fitting nicely in the right margin instead of leaving so much white space across the entire page. I could do it, but certainly not tonight--I'm going to turn into a pumpkin soon. Niteowlneils 04:45, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) I agree that your replacement is a great improvement over the original, I didn't mean to dismiss your contribution. The schematic drawing may be OK, because drawing a reflective surface by hand is extremely difficult. However, there are people here who are good with ray-tracers (see e.g. Image:Dodecahedron.jpg); a ray-traced image of a spoon lure would make a fantastic illustration. The other line drawings you mentioned are also improvements. They can be improved further, by the use of anti-aliasing. What I sometimes do in Gimp is to start with a design size that's an integer multiple of the intended maximal final size. So for the subway map, I would start with an image 4500 pixels wide, use a readable vector font for the labels, and save a private copy of the design in a lossless format. Then I would blur it very slightly and scale it down to 1500 pixels, using the best available scaling method (Gimp's default of linear interpolation should be changed to cubic interpolation), save it as PNG if it's a drawing, compress it further with pngcrush, and upload the resulting PNG file. For an example, compare the various revisions of Image:Logarithmic spiral.png. For function plots, I've automated this (see the script at Image:Gamma distribution.png). --MarkSweep 05:51, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) Commons:Taxonomy Hey there, I started a Taxonomy page on the commons to discuss the animal/plant gallery handling there. I thought you might be interested, so I left a note for you here. :-) --Conti|✉ 17:24, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Spelled/spelt etc. Hi. I just thought that I'd say (as a cross between an apology and an excuse) that it's often very difficult for a British-English speaker to tell the difference between genuine U.S. English and mistakes that are commonly made by U.S. writers (and, I've no doubt, the same applies the other way round). I mean, the busines of colour/color, centre/center, lift/elevator, etc. — that's easy enough. But (as I've just been discussing with another user) there's a huge grey area. For example, I'm sometimes told that the use of 'disinterested' to mean 'uninterested' or 'alternate' to mean 'alternative' is genuine U.S. English — but then other people, such as my U.S. colleagues, assure me that it isn't, it's just that a lot of Americans make those mistakes. Do So (doh!) when I come across what I'd normally think of as a spelling or grammar mistake, I have to try to work out what its status. And sometimes I get it wrong. I had no idea until someone made the same point on another article that 'spelled' was U.S. English (I corrected it automatically, as one would correct 'kneeled' to 'knelt'). I won't do it again... Yours was a neat solution, though. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:12, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Pardon me for butting in, but as a British-English speaker who's had a lot more exposure to written American than to written British English, and who is alternately amused and appalled by the concern over alleged American adulteration of "the language" that is expressed by otherwise sane British people, I have an interest. But I'm disinterested. Where was I? Right, the question was of "disinterested" and the like. Perhaps the simplest solution is to get a couple of good, recent dictionaries, one British, one American, making sure that these have not been influenced by soi-disant "language mavens". (If I remember right, some "American Heritage" dictionary has little comments by "experts". Avoid!) There's a splendid little book titled American Tongue and Cheek that can be picked up used for peanuts and that destroys a lot of the myths propagated by the "mavens". As for "disinterested", its use to mean something rather like "bored" is old in Britain as well as the US; I think this is rather a pity as "uninterested" does this well, and it's convenient to have to single word that unambiguously means "not gaining personally from any decision on". But there's no point making an issue out of this: I only use "disinterested" with the latter meaning, but I don't touch others' use of it with the former meaning. Sorry to go off at a tangent, but for the rare well-informed view on issues (or non-issues) of "good English", see Geoff Pullum: this (on singular "they") is a superb appetizer. -- Hoary 22:48, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC) Hi Mel, I like your nick, very clever. Hey Hoary, thanks for stopping by! Yes, the two Geoffs, Pullum and Nunberg, are among the few voices of sanity in this whole mess. I don't know of any good recent American dictionaries that would be comparable to the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary in terms of being thoroughly grounded in reality. My own view on matters of orthography is that in many cases it is possible to simply avoid using words and expressions that would be somewhat puzzling to a sizable group of people. Of course it's not always possible to find good workarounds: I wouldn't advocate the exclusive use of "hue" instead of colo(u)r, or "dissect" instead of "analye", "unconcerned"/"unbiased" instead of "disinterested", etc. It would be interesting to see if an article could be completely rewritten to avoid all of these forms while still sounding natural. --MarkSweep 02:26, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) (I'm having this discussion in parallel, prompted by exactly the same issue in both cases — purely coincidentally.) Interestingly I'd thought that 'analyze' (like 'compromize' or 'surprize') was a misspelling on both sides of the Atlantic (it's a back-formation from 'analysis', after all), so it's another example of a correction I'd have made automatically, not thinking that it was a U.S./U.K. matter. (Is 'disect'–'dissect' another, or was that a typo?) That was a genuine typo, now corrected. I once received an e-mail (nothing to do with Misplaced Pages) from someone who was angrily protesting at my comment that philosophy should be done disinterestedly and dispassionately... I see. "No, philosophy should be done passionately…" The problem with work-arounds is that either they (as with the 'hue' example) use literary words to replace everyday words, or (as with 'dissect' for 'analyse', or 'unconcerned' and 'disintersted') they're not fully synonymous. Indeed, English is unusual among European languages in having very few genuine synonyms, which is part of the reason that (again, unusually for a European language) elegant variation is frowned upon. I don't think that's true. I doubt that French has more true synonyms than English for example. Finally, with regard to Hoary's point, the fact that a usage can be found in older English isn't enough to demonstrate correctness — otherwise we'd have to accept people using 'silly' to mean 'holy', and 'nunnery' to mean 'brothel'... Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:03, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) Regarding "analyze", you at least have to admit that the AE convention results in less ambiguity. In BE orthography, "analyses" is ambiguous, and can either correspond to AE "analyses" (plural of "analysis") or to AE "analyzes" (3rd person singular form of "to analyze"). I think Hoary's point was only that "disinterested" has a long history of its own and can traditionally mean two different things. It appears that one of those meanings is gradually falling out of use and is no longer understood by a growing number of people. --MarkSweep 09:26, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) But if it can be shown that older usages have continued (despite complaints to the contrary), this might be an additional argument for correctness. -- Hoary 09:11, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC) Of course — but then you'd have evidence of recent accepted usage too, and wouldn't need to appeal to the older usage. Having said that, there are many other problems, not least being dialect. (I remember the first time I used the word 'mardy' after moving to London at the age of eighteen; I'd no idea that it wasn't standard English. I could have looked it up in a dictionary, of course, but children don't generally look up words that they know (unless they're rude words, of course; my image of the French was very peculiar for a long time after reading in an old French-English dictionary an illustrative use of the verb 'pisser': 'pisser au feu'). When alternative forms exist side by side, they're often not geographical, though those who use one form or the other sometimes think that they are. And, of course, people often simply don't know that there are alternative spelings (on one page I've had one anonymous user repeatedly changing my use of 'artefact' to 'artifact', insisting (though not in so many words) that I'm illiterate). Oh, by the way, 'mardy' isn't easily translated into standard English; someone who's mardy is a sulky spoilsport — at least, in Lincolnshire. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:22, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)Your continued donations keep Misplaced Pages running! User talk:HerrGoebbles (Difference between revisions) Jump to: navigation, search Revision as of 01:49, 19 February 2006 TastyCakes (Talk | contribs) User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message ← Older edit Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 HerrGoebbles (Talk | contribs) ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE Newer edit → Line 37: Line 37: | |||
| One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) :One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| + | |||
| + == ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE == | |||
| + | |||
| + MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| + | |||
| + HerrGoebbles | |||
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| Revision as of 11:54, 19 February 2006 Welcom wikipedia! | |||
| I kiss you!!! | |||
| Allahu Akbar! | |||
| Usammey 07:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for experimenting with Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Looper5920 07:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Contents 1 Hello 2 Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda 3 User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message 4 ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE | |||
| Hello What a life!!! Sitting around and producing propaganda for the masses!!! I hope you enjoy your hobby. You know controlling information is but one step away from controlling peoples thought processes. With time and practice, you too will become a well versed student of revisionist history. | |||
| Here is to an exciting and wonderful future!!! | |||
| Herr Goebbles | |||
| Hello. Actually I don't consider the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on." to be very useful information. But if by "writing revisionist history" you mean deleting dumb ass comments by people like you, then yes it does give me a sort of sick satisfaction. Enjoy your brief window of not being banned. TastyCakes 07:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Misplaced Pages Admins Use Gestapo Tactics to Enforce their Agenda Greetings, it is Germany 1939 all over again. Admin Mark Sweep and user TastyCakes conspire to silence another Misplaced Pages user that they find objectionable. After being called a "Dumb Ass" by user TastyCakes, and without any warning, Admin Mark Sweep, a former US Marine, has used his abilities as an admin to infinitely block my user priviledges. And all based on his personal dislike of my username, and his comradeship with user TastyCakes who were offended by a few harmless WORDS!!! Welcome to the world of those few who are endowed with superior genetics, and the ability to control what we read and learn!!! | |||
| HerrGoebbles | |||
| I'm not offended by your words, I just don't think they should be in Misplaced Pages because they suck. And apparently I'm not alone. Take care, TastyCakes 00:44, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| User TastyCakes Superior Intellect Shines in Message Greetings All!!! | |||
| Once again, the user TastyCakes showcases her superior intellect and reasoning in her response. Had TastyCakes followed the history of the original edits to US History and Expansion, TastyCakes would have seen that HerrGoebbles was only trying to add new information regarding the brutal consequences of US government sanctioned practices, which are clearly stated at the US Department of State website under: "Indian Treaties and the Removal act of 1830". Instead, user TastyCakes and an admin MarkSweep took it upon themselves to block user HerrGoebbles with absolutely no warning. This seems to be an accepted practice on Misplaced Pages embraced by a few users and Admins who wish to control and block any possibility of discussion about reality. | |||
| Welcome to The New World!!! | |||
| HerrGoebbles | |||
| One I'm a he. Two, I deleted the line "Poor Indians, it was simply time to move on". If you were going to add a useful comment about how Indians were treated, you should have done so with a little more effort. Ask yourself, could I imagine reading that line in an encyclopedia? Well I couldn't, so I deleted it. and Three, I had nothing to do with you getting banned. Oh and four, the fact that your name is HerrGoebbles, and that you are bending the facts in the most annoying way possible makes me think you're just screwing with me. So this will be my last response here. No hard feelings, just stop injecting crap into Misplaced Pages. TastyCakes 01:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ADMIN MARKSWEEP TO THE RESCUE MarkSweep lives and breathes for the moments when he can control the little world of Misplaced Pages. Rules of engagement apply to all those who partake of Misplaced Pages, alas MarkSweep is immune to these regulations. He blocks and deletes and derides at will! Who will rise up and denounce MarkSweep for the controlling little man that he is? Will no one have the courage? Block, censor, delete, replace, etc. etc. etc. MarkSweep, you are a man of little faith, and even less courage. The real Josef Goebbles would be proud to call you son!! | |||
| HerrGoebbles | |||
| Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:HerrGoebbles" ViewsUser page Discussion View source History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation Main Page Community Portal Current events Recent changes Random article Help Contact Misplaced Pages Donations Search | |||
| Toolbox | |||
| What links here Related changes User contributions Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link | |||
| Privacy policy About Misplaced Pages Disclaimers | |||
| Template:TAL episode (posted to User_talk:Leif) Hi Leif, I noticed that you reverted the TAL episode template to re-enable the external links. I don't disagree with that revert at all, I'd just like to give you a quick run-down of what happened and why they were disabled. Recently, list of This American Life episodes was listed on VfD. The decision was to keep it, but enough people felt that the article was no good with the external links enabled. I personally don't see how that comes into play (as I see it, if this episode list is deemed encyclopedic, adding information such as external links can only enrich the article, not render it unencyclopedic). In order to address some of the concerns expressed during the VfD, I refactored the episode list to use the newly created TAL episode template and disabled the external links. I don't know what's going to happen next, maybe someone will nominate the episode list again for deletion. Anyway, just a quick heads up, no further action required for now. Cheers, --MarkSweep 03:35, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I was actually the person who nominated the article for VfD. I didn't see anyone who said the article would be worth keeping if only the links were disabled and instructions for linking were added to the article. Saying that the article should be deleted "because it is just a list of links" is not the same as saying the article should be kept but the links should be disabled. Now that there are a few details about some episodes, there is more reason to keep the list (and of course, the majority of keep votes is reason enough). Disabling the links was completely pointless and I don't think it made the article any more keepable in anybody's view. ~leif ☺ HELO 03:49, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC) PRC, ROC, mainland China, Taiwan, etc. Hello MarkSweep. Thank you for joining the discussion over the titles of China-related topics articles. Would you mind help explain to the contributors who opposed renaming because they thought the new titles are confusing, that how these terms differ from each other, and how the choice of one of these terms as a title is important. Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 18:04, Feb 19 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I think that this whole controversy is indicative of a general problem of insufficient separation between policy and conventions on the one hand, and the implementation of these policies on the other. Based on the naming conventions, it is perfectly clear what each article should be called. However, some people oppose the moves because they are not familiar with the naming conventions, or because they disagree with them. This leads to pointless discussions when the main objective is to implement the policies. I'm not suggesting that the policies should be set in stone, clearly those should be up to debate. But we can't keep reopening the same discussion every time a change mandated by a policy is proposed. In the cases at hand, the question should simply be "according to the current naming conventions, what are the most appropriate names for these articles?". Personal opinion beyond the scope of these conventions should play no role, so if someone disagrees with the move, they should participate in the discussion of the naming conventions. In any case, a clear distinction between setting policy and implementing existing policies should be drawn, so that we don't have to revisit the same issues over and over. --MarkSweep 02:48, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) In fact some who opposed the moves have already proceeded to discuss the naming conventions itself. Curps has even edited the naming conventions, although being reverted. | |||
| It has become not only a matter of naming conventions, but a choice between familiarity and accuracy. Those who opposed at WP:RM probably also oppose the current naming conventions, and not follow it when they create new pages. | |||
| Thanks again for the helpful inputs. :-) — Instantnood 09:45, Feb 20 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It should be simple: every article should have an accurate title. If familiarity is an issue, it can be addressed by adding a redirect. (But in some cases this won't work: history of Taiwan is obviously different from history of the Republic of China, and neither can be simply redirected to the other.) In related news, there was a recent discussion on Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom#Suggested_page_titles of a similar nature, where someone suggested renaming that article into something "simpler", even though the result would have been less accurate and would have been inconsistent with the naming conventions for monarchs. I think all of this indicates that to the extent that naming convnetions and editorial policies are desirable, there should be a centralized discussion and separate implementation of those policies without having to go through the arguments for the conventions again each time they are implemented. --MarkSweep 09:56, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) What makes the situation more complicated is that everybody knows the current Queen of the UK (or "the Queen") is "Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom" with little objection, which is not the case for "Republic of China", a name many people have never heard about. The current discussion and vote can perhaps be the foundation for later moves, avoiding lengthy discussion again each time. — Instantnood 10:16, Feb 20 2005 (UTC) | |||
| And interestingly the results so far for X in the People's Republic of China → X in China and Politics of Taiwan → Politics of the Republic of China contradicts. — Instantnood 10:35, Feb 20 2005 (UTC) | |||
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |||
| Hello MarkSweep. The vote and discussion at Misplaced Pages:Requested moves#Economy of Taiwan → Economy of the Republic of China is getting messy. — Instantnood 12:30 Feb 28 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Image deletion Greetings! Over at the Commons, some images I've uploaded are being considered for deletion. I'd be interested in hearing your honest opinion on the matter there. Thanks! – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 13:07, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| RfC Hello there. I am recently being listed on RfC. Feel free to comment as you wish to. I regard it as a way out and to have the matter settled. Thanks. — Instantnood 18:07 Mar 1 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thank you very much MarkSweep. I am still a newbie to Misplaced Pages, and I did not expect some of the actions would have catched fire in this way. There are still a lot to do to build Misplaced Pages a better encyclopedia. If you don't mind and are interested, please also take a look at Talk:Hong Kong, Talk:Victoria City, Talk:Cathay Pacific destinations, User talk:Huaiwei, Talk:List of city listings by country (and its archive), Talk:List of cities by country, Talk:List of countries that only border one other country, Talk:List of roads and highways and Talk:List of cities in China, and the edit histories of the articles. I am also discussing with Grutness and trying to resolve the stub sorting trouble at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Stub sorting/Criteria#The China-Taiwan mess. Once again thanks for your help. Seems like I am always coming to you and ask for comments. :-P — Instantnood 00:54 Mar 2 2005 (UTC) The sharing at RfC seems to be over. I have made a response there. Please take a look. I do hope that with everyone's effort Misplaced Pages will soon be the best encyclopedia ever. :-D — Instantnood 21:23 Mar 5 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Deleting Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png I put Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png up for WP:IFD since I obsoleted it with Image:Normal distribtion cdf.png. Cburnett 03:52, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| In that case I'll have to recreate your image, because it's not antialiased. And BTW, you can use the "norm" function in gnuplot. --MarkSweep 03:56, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) OK, awesome. I'm trying to use your gnuplot to redo the expo distribution plots but I can't get it converted to png. I used the script on Image:Cumulative normal distribution.png to no avail (I get a segfault on pnmrotate!). Is that the same script you're using? Cburnett 05:17, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) Actually, what I've been doing lately is the following: Create PS output with gnuplot (the main reason is that you can use the Postscript Symbol font and it has some support for subscripts and superscripts). Open the PS output in Gimp at high resolution (3000 by 4000 pixels or larger). (Update: I've been using 600 dpi recently, which results in images of about 4500 by 6000 pixels.) Blur the image slightly. (Gaussian blur, 5 pixel radius.) Dilate. Autocrop. Scale down to 960 by 720. 1300 by 975 There must be is a way to automate that and to run Gimp in batch mode, but I haven't played with it yet. I don't use the old script anymore, because it leaves too much space around the figures. I could gradually (re-)create all of these plots in the same style (and perhaps upload them to the Commons instead), starting this weekend. --MarkSweep 06:58, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) "Mainland China" in titles Hello. I have proposed at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) to change the title of some articles and categories. Would you be interested to join the discussion and say something? — Instantnood 20:26, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hello again MarkSweep. Can you come and say something? Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 15:01, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC) Template:deletebecauseoncommons Agreed, there are some issues here. I only used it for images I uploaded myself, as well as a few with no history that I had no qualms about uploading, all | |||
| This image comes from www.trainweb.com. TrainWeb allows it to be used for any purpose, as long as the text "www.trainweb.com" is printed near the photo or in a photo credits area. This does not apply to the TrainWeb logo, which is usage-restricted. | |||
| images. --SPUI (talk) 22:12, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Gnuplot I really like Image:Normal distribution cdf.png. Where can I learn to do that? This is the best I could figure out: Image:Dba plot.png - Omegatron 01:14, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| The trick is oversampling: use Gnuplot/Gimp to create an image several times larger than the size that you intend to upload, optionally blur it slightly, then scale it down to the desired size (which may have to be scaled down further for use in articles). I would strongly recommend using the PostScript output ("terminal") setting of gnuplot, since it has the most features (plus you can edit the generated PostScript code if necessary), then open the .ps file in Gimp at a high resolution (I use 500dpi or at least 3000 by 4000 pixels for the image dimensions). Some of the steps for the PDF/CDF plots are described a few entries further up on this talk page. I can plot the dba function for you, but I would like to do it directly in gnuplot, if possible. My understanding of maxima is limited, as I've only started using it recently: so H is (the real part?) of a (complex?) rational function. But what does db() do? I can't find it in the maxima documentation. Could you write down the definition of H in Mathematica notation? --MarkSweep 03:43, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC) oops. db() is my own function... i'll have to fix that. - Omegatron 05:46, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC) Is db(x) = 20 log10(x)? --MarkSweep 08:50, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC) Does the following gnuplot code work? | |||
| kA = 7.397057228624818216e9 H(s) = kA*s**4 / ((s+129.4)**2 * (s+676.7) * (s+4636) * (s+76655)**2) dba(f) = 20 * log10(abs(H(2 * {0.0,1.0} * pi * f))) | |||
| set grid set logscale x 10 set xlabel "Frequency (Hz)" set ylabel "Gain (dB)" | |||
| plot (x>2e4)? 0/0 : dba(x) lt 3 notitle If it works, it's fairly easy to generate smooth PNG output via PostScript. --MarkSweep 09:19, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Excellent fix! Thanks! - Omegatron 16:51, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC) Proposed reorganization of Taiwan Someone proposed something at Talk:Taiwan#Proposal_for_New_Organization_.283.2F19.2F2005.29.2C_Please_Comment, if you would take a look and comment....--Jiang 01:10, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| The proposed resolution to the RFC arising from the Sollog page In essence I agree with the resolution - especially since my posts elsewhere are now being trashed on the RFC pages. But surely, just as people tracked down the Sollog sockpuppets, so Wikipedians will track down my IP and start all over again? The Number 01:57, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I replied on your talk page. --MarkSweep 00:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) Patent template Template:US patent is a neat idea, thanks. — Matt Crypto 10:10, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I'm glad you like it. --MarkSweep 00:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) Cauchy Distribution graphic Ha! Another picture person. Excellent job on the Cauchy distribution graphics. PAR 00:45, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Cburnett and I have started to systematically (re-)generate all existing distribution plots and upload them to the Commons. I might eventually get to the Lévy distribution too, but have been putting it off because it requires writing C code. --MarkSweep 00:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) Can I ask you to keep putting it off? I would like to try to generate them, while trying to conform to the look that you have on the ones you generated. I'll play around with it, trying to get the look, and let you know when I upload something to Levy, then let me know what you think. Also, I didn't generate those point-by-point, I just took the FFT of the discretized characteristic function, which makes things simpler. PAR 01:33, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) Sure, nothing easier than putting things off. ;-) --MarkSweep 01:51, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) Hi - can you tell me what font you are using for your standardized plots? PAR 03:39, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It's Times (standard PostScript font), because it matches the PostScript Symbol font. You can find the gnuplot source code for the plots e.g. at Commons:Image:Cauchy distribution pdf.png. It's best to use the enhanced PostScript backend of gnuplot, because it's the most flexible. Once I have the .ps file, I open it in Gimp. The remaining steps in Gimp are described above on this talk page. I'd be happy to help out, if necessary. Cheers, --MarkSweep 04:57, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC) I finished the Levy distribution plot, but haven't had time to do the infobox. Could you check it for consistency with your plots before I start churning these out for a few more distributions? Thanks - PAR 07:21, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Sorry, didn't see this in time. Your Levy plot is excellent: smooth, without appearing fuzzy or blurred. --MarkSweep 02:05, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) Your vote is needed! Hello MarkSweep. Despite the ongoing discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) over the use of the terms "mainland China" and "People's Republic of China", SchmuckyTheCat and Huaiwei have listed category:Cities in mainland China, category:Companies of mainland China and category:Laws of mainland China onto Misplaced Pages:Categories for deletion. | |||
| Your vote is now essential and vital for the survival of these categories, and to avoid attempts to bar the Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Chinese) from truly enforced. — Instantnood 20:44, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Update: there's also a poll at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese). — Instantnood 01:02, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks MarkSweep. — Instantnood 02:27, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC) Arbitration Hello MarkSweep. I've got listed onto requests for arbitration by SchmuckyTheCat. Could you have a look? Thanks. — Instantnood 04:29, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Re: Template:Isd Hi MarkSweep, | |||
| Thanks for your message, Template:Isd has been restored. My apologies for deleting it in error. I just started out in the cleaning department. :) | |||
| - Mailer Diablo 22:50, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| No problem. Thanks for restoring it. --MarkSweep 20:50, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC) Thanks Mark for helping on the "Junkyard" Article! Hey dude, you do a great job, please can you help on the Junkyard (disamiwhateveration) and Junkyard (band) formatting/configuration, so it looks acceptable, Thanks again, TJ (this stands for "Terrible Joe") | |||
| Unverified orphans This is regarding your comments at Misplaced Pages talk:Images and media for deletion/Unverified orphans#So what do we do about those UOs? Request for comments.. Please note that there are many UOs that satisfy one of more of the following: | |||
| They weren't orphaned to begin with and were removed from articles by people paranoid about copyrights. They were uploaded before mid-2004 which is when people decided to include non-GFDL non-PD non-fair-use images. Long ago everything was GFDL or PD (we had to agree to GFDL-redistributability while uploading) and there was no requirement to tag, then fair-use came to be allowed and then came allowing other licenses and image-tagging. Their uploaders have since left the project and hence can't be contacted for updating the image with licensing info. They might be redundant images in an article, but may be useful as a commons resource on the subject. Orphans don't load the image server since nearly nobody sees them. Please see my messages here, here, here, here, and here and the meagre response I was able to get. | |||
| If you feel I am not a trusted person enough to be bothered about, you could see Jamesday's opinion on Misplaced Pages talk:Copyright violations on history pages and Anthere's opinion here, here and here and Sj's opinion here. | |||
| As you could see from my messages, I would like a proper place where many people discuss the current image deletion policy, but I don't know what to do. Thanks for any help. -- Paddu 08:53, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Please come and vote! Following the long discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) regarding proper titling of ROC-/Taiwan-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here. Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thanks. — Instantnood 06:15, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| binomial (disambiguation) Hello. | |||
| I think links to binomial (disambiguation) should usually be in a notice at the top of the article, saying | |||
| For other topics using the name "binomial", see binomial (disambiguation). The "see also" list at the bottom should be for related topics, not for unrelated topics that happen to use the same word. Also, people who find the long article titled "bishop" when looking for an article about the chess pieces called "bishops" are not likely to scroll all the way to the bottom and find the notice about "other uses". Michael Hardy 20:43, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Good point. I see you already fixed the relevant cases. I was merely zapping double redirects without thinking. --MarkSweep 21:17, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) Plea for help Hi Mark, | |||
| sorry for asking you directly but I have again a color problem and I have to admit that I did not managed to fix this with Gimp. I tried to follow the advises you gave me, but it did not become better - I guess I need some more experience. If you have time and desire to fix this you might have a look at Featured_pictures_candidates/Image:EuropeanParliament.jpg. Tillea 21:14, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| RfA thanks Thank you for the vote at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Henrygb2. It has made my week. --Henrygb 01:57, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You're welcome. Congratulations! --MarkSweep 23:43, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) Help with inserting image from commons in wikipedia Hi... I hope it isn't highly inappropriate to ask you personally. I uploaded an image to the Wikimedia commons, Commons:Image:Orphan-typesetting.png, to be used in article Orphan (typesetting). For the life of me, I cannot figure out how to make it display in the article!! Can you please help me? Thanks, Smooth Henry 23:20, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC). | |||
| It's cool. I've added the image to the article for you. Have a look at the source – it works just like adding a local image. I've also changed the PD-US tag on the Commons: if you created the image yourself (which I assume is the case here) and want to release it into the public domain, you can use the | |||
| This image has been (or is hereby) released into the public domain by its creator, Smoothhenry. This applies worldwide. | |||
| In case this is not legally possible, | |||
| the creator grants anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law. | |||
| Subject to disclaimers. | |||
| license tag. Cheers, --MarkSweep 23:40, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Hah. It never even occured to me that it would be that easy... Thanks a lot! --Smooth Henry 18:30, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC) "China"/"PRC" vs. "mainland China" for page titles Following the long discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) regarding proper titling of Mainland China-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here. Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thank you. — Instantnood 12:49, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I need your help Hello MarkSweep. A request for arbitration has been filed against me at WP:RFAr by Snowspinner as the AMA advocate for jguk. What do you think I can do? — Instantnood 20:44, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for your advice MarkSweep. I am seeking assistance from AMA, to have the case better handled. I'll take your advice, and I won't be hestitant to seek further assistance from you, say, making a statement or hunting for evidence, when it is necessary. Thanks again for your generous help. :-D — Instantnood 21:55, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC) Instantnood RFAr Thanks for your comments and info on the case, I appreciate it. If you ever have anything else you think of feel free to let me know about it! --Wgfinley 03:33, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for your additional comments, I agree with your points and am going to be revising the response here shortly. --Wgfinley 23:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) Roasted coffee Hi Mark! I'm a bit annoyed you suppressed both the Featured Picture tag | |||
| This is a featured picture, which means that community consensus has identified it as one of the finest images on Misplaced Pages, adding significantly to its accompanying article. If you have an image of similar quality, be sure to upload it, using the proper free license tag, then add it to a relevant article and nominate it. | |||
| and the copyright license tag on this picture : http://commons.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Image:Roasted_coffee_beans.jpg&diff=0&oldid=85750 Is there something wrong with the picture? Are you the copyright holder? I'm mainly embarrassed because the picture still shows on Commons Featured pictures ... villy 18:55, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) (villy on the Cmmons) | |||
| I've replied at Commons:User talk:Aurevilly. --MarkSweep 22:06, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) Thanks for your answer. I did not notice the actual chronology and yes, it is weird. I juts "reverted" to the last version ... villy 06:51, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Probably a software glitch. Perhaps we can ask a developer to look into this? --MarkSweep 06:53, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) Re: Archiving I intended to make the history of my talk page more easily located, by cutting the records according to archive pages. I have tried, say or even and it still works. Only urls using &diff=next or &diff=prev will stop working. I'm not sure if it is necessary to have things restored tho. — Instantnood 21:38, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Brilliant. I didn't realize those diffs would still work. But just to be safe, check with an admin and/or developer (perhaps on the #mediawiki channel) if restoring the talk page is recommended. --MarkSweep 21:43, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) Commons vs Misplaced Pages question Hi - I have a question - I uploaded a file to the commons named PlackianLocus.png. The image I was expecting to update has the same name but is in Misplaced Pages. The commons image does not replace the Misplaced Pages image in articles. Do you know the best way to get articles to access the new image? Thanks for any help - PAR 06:11, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You'll have to list the local picture for deletion (perhaps those cases qualify for speedy deletion now, but I'm not sure). Point out that an image of the same name exists on the Commons, which means that once the local image has been deleted, it will be transparently replaced by the version from the Commons. It's not possible to embed images from the Commons (or anywhere else) directly. The only way to embed a Commons image is to say where foo.jpg exists one the Commons but doesn't exist locally. If it exists locally, it will preempt the inclusion of the Commons image. --MarkSweep 19:10, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) I was afraid of that. - Thanks for the help. PAR 22:25, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Misplaced Pages:Chinese naming controversy Dunno if you have noticed there's another discussion at Misplaced Pages:Chinese naming controversy, started by Uncle Ed. Do take a look. :-D — Instantnood 14:42, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| If you can, please take a look at the accuracy dispute at Talk:Economy of China--Jiang 06:05, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Request for help My User page keeps on getting vandalised. Under the 3-revert rule there is a limit as to how many times I can revert the vandalism. You are clearly buddy-buddy with one of the vandals, can you please exert some pressure....or does Misplaced Pages really consist of people who carry out such childish behaviour? | |||
| Sollogfan 11:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| There is no limit for vandalism....especially on your own talk page. Cburnett 14:32, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) It must be noted that 'Sollogfan' is a sockpuppet account; the vandalism he refers to involves re-instating the 'sockpuppet' image.-Ashley Pomeroy 23:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC) It must be noted that .Ashley Pomeroyis telling (deliberate) untruths to justify his obsessive vandalism. He has not provided one iota of evidence that I am Sollog. Sollogfan 11:15, 13 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It should be noted that my account is NOT a | |||
| It is suspected that this user might be a sock puppet or impersonator of Sollog. | |||
| Please refer to for evidence. See block log | |||
| account. Do you even know what a | |||
| It is suspected that this user might be a sock puppet or impersonator of Sollog. | |||
| Please refer to for evidence. See block log | |||
| is? Sollogfan 11:58, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You vandalise my page and ignore Sweep - so I descend to your childish level. Sollogfan 11:58, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Without commenting on the substance of the alleged vandalism, whenever you're thinking that you need to stoop to someone else's "childish level", you are automatically wrong. Don't bite the bait, if you think that's what's going on. --MarkSweep 19:05, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) My page continues to be vandalised by Pomeroy. I have ignored it but it continues. I now expect you to reprimand me for simply doing to Pomeroy what he does to me - after all, unfairness is a by-word hereSollogfan 11:15, 13 May 2005 (UTC) Interesting that when Sollogfan asked for help and complained about vandalism you waited and waited and then.......sent the bullying for arbitration because Sollogfan fought back! Incredible! The Number 13:02, 15 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Gamma & inv-gamma plots Looking at commons:Image:Gamma distribution cdf.png, your gnuplot code uses this for the cdf: | |||
| pgamma(x, shape, rate) = (x<0)? 0 : igamma(shape, x*rate) except the parameterization is the k/theta not alpha/beta so the cdf should be x/rate not x*rate (x/rate was my original code and x*rate was your fix). I don't understand how the k/theta notation works for the pdf but doesn't for the cdf. | |||
| I'm trying to generate an inverse-gamma cdf but can't get a cdf generated. Maybe the cdf is wrong. Cburnett 21:47, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| You do realize that the function that actually gets plotted is f and not pgamma, right? Function f is defined as | |||
| f(x, k, t) = pgamma(x, k, 1.0/t) | |||
| The only reason the function is called pgamma is for compatibility with R. The gnuplot code is taken from a bigger gnuplot file I use that defines many pdfs and cdfs in a way that is as close to R as possible, for my own sanity. Notice that the third paramter of pgamma and dgamma is called "rate" and not "scale", just the way R does it. I think it was for this distribution that there was a problem at an earlier point with the pdf and cdf plots not matching, so I uploaded one gnuplot script with matching definitions and either the cdf part of the pdf part commented out. Or did I just completely misunderstand your question? Now for the inverse-gamma distribution, something is wrong in the current version of that article. Let me work on that and get back to you (on this talk page). --MarkSweep 22:03, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) DOH! I missed the reciprocal in f(). I'm quite certain that the inverse-gamma pdf is correct and I'm sure I got the cdf from the same source as the pdf so that should be correct as well. Cburnett 22:54, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) Actually, the inverse-gamma cdf was wrong, at least according to the conventions for γ(a,z) and Γ(a,z) that are used in Misplaced Pages. The correct cdf (now fixed in the article) is as follows: | |||
| In other words, this is the upper incomplete gamma function (where the Gamma integral starts at β / x instead of at zero) divided by the complete Gamma function. This fraction is also known as the regularized upper incomplete Gamma function (but there is widespread confusion about the terminlogy). gnuplot implements the regularized lower incomplete Gamma function as igamma: | |||
| So the InvGamma pdf and cdf can be implemented in gnuplot as follows: | |||
| dinvgamma(x,a,b) = exp(a*log(b) - lgamma(a) - (a+1)*log(x) - b*1.0/x) | |||
| pinvgamma(x,a,b) = 1 - igamma(a, b*1.0/x) | |||
| I've plotted these and they seem to pass integration-by-eye. --MarkSweep 23:05, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) Thanks a lot! Got them uploaded now. Cburnett 23:27, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) Cburnett's admin nomination I was nominated for administrator and I'd like to hear your opinion at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Cburnett. Cburnett 07:23, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Please explain I am really offended with your saying my revision to "blardy" made no sense. I just used a visual example which seemed far clearer to me than the first example. If I'm mistaken, that would be one thing, but I'm not. When blue is written in black print, it is antiblardy. When blue is written in blue print, it is blardy. So blardiness or antiblardiness are not inherent qualities of a word. What is the mistake in that?--The Dogandpony 01:11, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Your example made no sense to me precisely because you tossed in another dimension. The previous examples were about words and their conventional orthographic representations, which are still inherent properties of the words themselves, not of specific occurrences. A second objection is that "blue" may not appear blue everywhere – for example, if I'm reading the article in a text-based browser, the link will not necessarily be blue. This is very hard to fix. I thought about "italicized" vs. "italicized", but that runs into similar problems. The best I could think of vs. "CAPITALIZED" vs. "capitalized". But even if this second problem could be resolved, there is still the issue that you're talking about occurrences of words, not about words as abstract units. --MarkSweep 01:35, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) Amicus curiosus brief Did you mean Amicus Curiae Brief? — Xiong熊talk 04:34, 2005 Apr 26 (UTC) | |||
| Well, there is a link to amicus curiæ, but I was going for the idea of the curious bystander. Though I guess curiosus does not quite mean "curious". ;-) --MarkSweep 04:42, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) Can you do something about 50Stars and the List of national flags article? I've exhaused my reverts for the day and posted everything that's I wanted to post on the talk page...and he's still reverting. --Jiang 04:29, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Rendering Math Hi Mark - On both my machines, the \, works fine to force TeX to PNG. Could you do me a favor and check it again? Did you make sure it wasn't an old cached image or something? Thanks. PAR 05:25, 6 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It depends on your user preferences. I've set mine to "HTML if possible or else PNG" for editing, which results in \, being rendered as a space. --MarkSweep 06:30, 6 May 2005 (UTC) Hi Mark - I think the \! character is too strong - it makes "HTML if possible, else PNG" give PNG, and for somebody who prefers HTML and has chosen preference 3, thats bad. If you choose "HTML if very simple, else PNG" then the \, character will give PNG. Please look at User talk:Cburnett#Rendering Math | |||
| Now I'm confused: I thought you wanted to force PNG rendering in displayed formulas? Here's my current understanding of the situation: If you want to force PNG rendering, then use \!, because \, will not work for all settings. If you don't want PNG, then it's simple: don't add anything. But I must be missing something here. --MarkSweep 16:58, 6 May 2005 (UTC) My current understanding of what I want is:) Preference = "Always render PNG"............................All inline=PNG, all displayed=PNG Preference = "HTML if very simple, else PNG"........All inline=HTML, all displayed=PNG Preference = "HTML if possible, else PNG"...............All inline=HTML, all displayed=HTML Articles should be written to maximize the above. They probably cant always be written so that the above is completely true. When \, is added to a "simple" displayed formula, it goes from HTML to PNG under preference #2 but stays HTML under #3 which is good. When \! is added, it gets displayed as PNG even under #3 which is not good. PAR 18:54, 6 May 2005 (UTC) I basically agree with you, but I don't think point 3 is realistic, simply because HTML rendering is too limited. Things like multiple subscripts or superscripts, continued fractions, under-braces, etc. cannot be rendered as HTML at all, or do not look intelligible when rendered as HTML. Also, most big formulas (big sum, product, integral signs, even fractions) look just plain ugly in HTML. Finally, there is the issue of consistency and control over fonts: if you have a kappa in a PNG formula and a kappa in an HTML formula, they look very different in my browser (in fact, I can't distinguish a kappa from a k at all in HTML, but that may just be my font choices). Anyway, for consistency and control over fonts (since you know PNG will use Computer Modern), PNG may be preferrable. Overall I don't see anything wrong with always forcing PNG rendering for certain displayed formulas. I thought that's what you wanted to do. --MarkSweep 19:16, 6 May 2005 (UTC) Well, it was, but my thinking was clarified by reading the discussion between you and Cburnett. I just want us to get a semi-standard way of doing things so we don't waste time reverting each others edits, since we are working on some of the same stuff. How about: Preference = "Always render PNG"............................All inline=PNG, all displayed=PNG Preference = "HTML if very simple, else PNG"........All inline=HTML, all displayed=PNG Preference = "HTML if possible, else PNG"...............All inline=HTML, all displayed=HTML with the proviso that #3 can really look bad, and if it does, add a \! to force PNG under all circumstances. If you agree with that, how about we run it by Cburnett and see what he thinks and then we can go back and edit the chi-square article? If we can agree on that article, I think we are good to go. PAR 20:18, 6 May 2005 (UTC) That sounds good. Let's work on getting the chi-square article into a format we are all happy with. I'm not going to edit it for the time being. If you think I went overboard with my latest changes a couple of days ago, feel free to revert. --MarkSweep 02:06, 7 May 2005 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:MarkSweep/archive2" ViewsUser page Discussion Edit this page + History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation Main Page Community Portal Current events Recent changes Random article Help Contact Misplaced Pages Donations Search | |||
| Toolbox | |||
| What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link | |||
| This page was last modified 19:37, 22 February 2006. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details). Misplaced Pages® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Privacy policy About Misplaced Pages Disclaimers | |||
| Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:MarkSweep/archive5" | |||
| Categories: TrainWeb images | User-created public domain images | Misplaced Pages featured pictures | Misplaced Pages:Suspected sockpuppets of Sollog | Misplaced Pages:Suspected sockpuppets | |||
| ViewsUser page Discussion Edit this page + History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation | |||
| Main Page | |||
| Community Portal | |||
| Current events | |||
| Recent changes | |||
| Random article | |||
| Help | |||
| Contact Misplaced Pages | |||
| Donations | |||
| Search | |||
| Toolbox | |||
| What links here | |||
| Related changes | |||
| Upload file | |||
| Special pages | |||
| Printable version | |||
| Permanent link | |||
| This page was last modified 19:46, 22 February 2006. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details). | |||
| Misplaced Pages® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. | |||
| Privacy policy About Misplaced Pages Disclaimers | |||
Latest revision as of 12:47, 14 March 2023
AI Arbitration case
The Arbitration case against AI has closed. Given that you brought it, I thought you might be interested. The results include AI being banned until the legal dispute is resolved.
Yours,
James F. (talk) 01:03, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Uh oh
Hey MarkSweep, User:Viriditas has called me a troll . Could you have a look? Thanks. Wyss 12:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
- Oops, didn't see this in time. Looks like you guys got it sorted out now. Cheers, --MarkSweep✍ 05:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Review
Hello Mark I'd like to know if you would be interested to take a look at my proposal to rewrite the mainland China article, at my sandbox, which was written based on user:Alassius' proposal and the discussion at talk:mainland China. Thanks. :-) — Instantnood 18:20, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Vandalims
I would like to report, that User:Instantnood has taken to vandalism to archieve his aims. In Hong Kong national football team, he tried to speed delete it dispite the fact that it fails to meet any criteria for speedy deletion, and has taken to constantly reverting that notice after my removal of it.--Huaiwei 11:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Restoration request
User:SchmuckyTheCat and user:Huaiwei has attempted to move the article on Hong Kong's football team from the title Hong Kong national football team to Hong Kong Representative Team, saying that the team is not a national team , with the word "national" defined in their way(s). User:Huaiwei first moved the article to Hong Kong Representative Team, and then moved it again to Hong Kong representative football team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) . It made the original title Hong Kong national football team (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) a double redirect, and he fixed the double redirect , thus creating edit history. Since the original title is no longer a pure redirect with no other edit history, it is impossible to restore the content under the original title. I demanded for formal procedure, that is, to request the move at WP:RM. To do this, I tagged the original title as speedy (with {{deletebecause}}), so that article can be restored under the original title. Huaiwei objected this , and labelled me as vandalism . Would you mind look into what had happened, and help restore the content under the original title, so that the move can be discussed through formal procedures? Thank you. — Instantnood 13:04, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- User:Instantnood incorrectly said my renaming of the article was due to me saying it is "not a national team". My effort was based on the fact that the Hong Kong Football Association refers to it as such . The usage by HKFA as the official body overseeing the team should take precedence over all other uses. Taking a redirect for speedy delete means it must fulfill the relevant criteria for speedy deletion. Failing to do so contravenes wikipolicy, and his insistance on restoring the request even after repeated warnings amounts to vandalism.--Huaiwei 13:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
I understand this is not the place for me to have a dialogue with Huaiwei. But since he has raised some evidence to back himself, instead of providing a full picture, I have to provide some additional information for your decision.
The Hong Kong Football Association also calls other national teams "representative teams", for instance, Japan , since the teams are representing their countries. It is a conventions here that the HKFA calls its team "Olympics representative team", "Asian Cup representative team", "World Cup representative team", etc., as the members of the team for each event is selected every time. The Olympics representative team and Asian Cup representative team are not compose of the same players.
Other evidence I have mentioned in the speedy deletion request was that China Daily , InvestHK , BBC Sport , HKFA and Man Utd are all calling it "Hong Kong national team".
Since the move is debatable, I would like to request you to restore it as it was, so as to allow a formal move request be filed, and the move be discussed. Thanks. — Instantnood 13:33, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- I provide whatever information I happen to be aware of. Is the team mentioned in Japan's national team? The JFA refers to its teams specifically as national teams . The HKFA does not, and probably for good reason.--Huaiwei 13:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm the one that first moved it to Hong Kong Representative Team, not Huaiwei. In fact, I moved three teams, HK, Macau, and Guam. I first researched the teams associations to see if they had a preferred name. HKFA does have a preferred name, either Hong Kong Representative Team or sometimes Team Hong Kong. I did this because a year or so ago, it appears that some football fans took some initiative (and good on them for it) and made template titled and formed articles for every team in FIFA. Unfortunately, they named every team "national" if it didn't already have an article. In any case, I moved HK to it's associations preferred name, and Macau and Guam to "regional".
- I tell you this so that you don't think I made a bunch of unresearched and reflexive moves. In Macau's case, I also removed POV statements to the effect of "they suck". When 'nood instinctively reverted, he didn't bother to fix statements such as these either. He is so busy restoring and focusing on maintaining "national" that he's also removing constructive edits.
- There certainly aren't any "squatters rights" to keep an obviously incorrect name. Let 'nood put it on wp:rm for discussion if he wants them moved back. SchmuckyTheCat 15:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
I've fixed the double redirect and would advise you to discuss any further moves on the talk page of the new article and to leave a note on WP:RM. For better or for worse, Misplaced Pages encourages you to be bold. In this case, if someone moves an article and the move was not done in bad faith, I see no reason to undo it. You're more than welcome to discuss whether the article should be moved back to its former title. The redirects should stay, because they are currently in use and they also help readers locate the article. Regardless of my opinion on their current usefulness, I don't see how the redirects would qualify as speedy deletion candidates. On a general note, I don't think there is any point in labeling each other's edits as "vandalism" etc.: it's clear that there is an underlying substantive debate and disagreement, which you're encouraged to resolve by discussion. Real vandalism, to me, is mostly of the "Bozo wuz here LOL!!11111" kind. The edits you call "vandalism" are just indications that the disagreement is not being resolved by debate. If you cannot decide amongst yourselves, then start an RfC and ask for more input on this issue. For what it's worth, I personally don't have strong feelings about either title, they both seem basically Ok to me. Cheers, --MarkSweep✍ 18:04, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks so much Mark. In fact in the past I have been using {{deletebecause}} when the destination is occupied in a move (for instance: Mister Softee and KCR Light Rail), either because of cut-and-paste moves, or duplicate articles at destinations. It has been alright and that's basically what I was doing for these articles on football teams: to restore the articles back to the original titles, and to move forward to initiate a move request discussion. You're most welcome to take part in future discussions on the move requests. Thanks again for your kind attention, Mark. — Instantnood 18:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Vandal watch
Mark, would you please put your extra pair of eyes on Schnorrer. Feel free to block on sight the user accounts that blank the dab notice at the top of the page. SchmuckyTheCat 22:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've added it to my watchlist. The article is currently protected, and I'll watch out for further activity once it gets unlocked. The dab notice is very useful indeed, because people who don't know about umlauts or can't easily enter them in the search box will end up at this article. I can also see why someone may have a problem with the presence of the dab notice, but its overall usefulness far outweighs any perceived smear due to its presence. The silly vandalism and sockpuppetry clearly have to stop too. --MarkSweep✍ 00:47, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks -- Endowment
Thanks for your edits to the endowment page. --zephern
Curps-like accounts....
....have all already been username blocked by a bot written by Curps. Just to save you some time! -Splash 03:03, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
Underlining section headings
I'm just a Wilkipedian newbie, so go easy... P=)
Is it a firm Wilkipedian style no-no to underline the section headings, or does it depend on the page? I just think it looks neater with the underlines.
Also, I notice most headings are "== Title ==", but some are "==Title==": Shouldn't they all be "== Title =="? ~Kaimbridge~ 00:15, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
- Whoops, I didn't see your message to me! ~Kaimbridge~ 00:20, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Signature glyph
Please could you put {{unicode}} around the very pretty glyph in your signature? I can't see it otherwise, and I suspect nor can a whole load of others. (FYI that's a very cheap template, but maybe you might like to copy in the raw code?) HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 09:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- How about this: longer signature, but only ASCII characters? --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:41, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- More legible but nowhere near so pretty (can you tell I preferred the old one? :-). Cheers. —Phil | Talk 16:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
210.8.54.34
I blocked the IP right before you cleared WP:AIV, but now I think I may have been misreading timestamps earlier on the warnings. I don't see much evidence of good-faith contributions, and think the IP has been generously warned already, but should I unblock? Sorry, I'm a little new at this. — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 05:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
- I'm a bit torn: on the one hand, the IP has few, if any, good contributions; on the other hand, we don't want to punish good behavior (like desisting when warned). Let's leave it blocked for a while, I might unblock later. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 05:13, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, sorry for the over-enthusiasm on my part. Part of the problem was my local time offset (I'm contributing from Japan); I've reset my preferences to accord with the server time, for simplicity's sake, in the future. I set the block for a week based on Essay's last block, and the fact that all the diffs I sampled appeared to be vandalism. If you want to let them off after 24 hours or so, I'll defer to you, though I expect it will only serve as a temporary reprieve. Thanks, — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 05:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
The Second Law Vandal
Hi MarkSweep - some anon user is using multiple IP's to insert the same nonsense into the second law of thermodynamics article. This person does not respond to repeated requests to discuss the situation, and reverts every time someone fixes the problem. List of IP's from which this vandalism originates:
- User:66.92.162.185 00:56 21 November 2005
- User:128.164.129.1 00:56 21 November 2005
- User:161.253.152.34 03:36, 21 November 2005
- User:66.92.162.133 10:07, 21 November 2005
I have put Verror3 warnings on these IP's. Your help, as in the past, would be greatly appreciated. PAR 14:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
Rome
Infobox is a great addition.
Some other things are a real mess - leading to either inconsistent information across the episodes, OR you're planning on ripping out information and comments in other episode pages.
See discussion for "How Titus Pullo Brought Down the Republic"
More Rome
I added an "abstract" to The Stolen Eagle of my own devising, just as a place holder for now - it's pretty rough - but it's 3am for me.
You've got a good eye for making screen captures for the episodes, btw.
Stability (probability)
Hi MarkSweep - I emptied that article User:PAR/Work7 because it was just a work page I used to develop the Stability (probability) article. Since I didn't know of any article that developed the idea of a location-scale family, I developed it in this article, but it was a step towards the main idea of the article, which was to discuss the stability of such a family. Maybe the development of the location-scale concept could be extracted from the article and put into the location-scale article, leaving a smaller section in the stability article? PAR 02:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Query on how to block
Hi, I just caught IP 213.249.155.237 vandalising at Comic book and Mary Shelley. He seems a persistent vandal User talk:213.249.155.237, can he be blocked without warning? If so, do I just got to Block user and enter the IP address and give a 24 hr block? Apologies, but I've not been an admin long and I just want to double check, and I noticed your name at Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism with a recent time stamp. Steve block talk 12:24, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- Cheers for that, I blocked the user for 3 hours. Steve block talk 12:40, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
Time to press on
Since the ArbCom case that I was involved has eventually been closed , I believe it's time to go forward on how the entire issue can be resolved. What do you think? Would centralised discussion be a good way? — Instantnood 18:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
- I would take it easy for now. Centralized discussion is only a good idea if there is a small set of simple questions that can be presented to, and adequately judged by, the larger community. I don't think we're at that stage yet. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Clean-up of Bayes' Theorem talk
I'm a little confused as to how you selected the "snide comments" to delete on the Talk:Bayes' theorem page. I recognise my comments were somewhat below the level of civility that I usually try to display, but they were not uncalled for. They were provoked by comments from Wile E. Heresiarch, such as these:
- "I don't understand what's going on here, but I'll tell you what to do anyway" is a weak position to argue from, but you don't let that slow you down. I'm accustomed to arguing with people who know what they're talking about; I really don't know how to deal with you.
- If you can't follow an argument of this kind, I have to wonder why you're editing this page. If you don't comprehend the different levels of exposition, you can't make a reasoned choice between them.
Those are clear attacks in my book. Yet you left them untouched in your clean-up efforts, when you went after the sarcastic replies Heresiarch earned for himself because of these. I would very much like to know how you drew the line between acceptable and unacceptable in this case. --Ritchy 19:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- It's a matter of opinion, obviously. Some postings were more insulting than others. In this case, Wile said directly what he thought without the dripping sarcasm seen in other posts. I find that much less objectionable than some of the replies he got (not "earned"). --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Left you some messages
In case you're too busy editing to notice, I left you some messages in IRC. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
de-spam
Erm I guess even though you are probably 'pedantically' correct the links to product pages on some tea shops (reasonably) in the references on Lapsang souchong and lots of other pages are there because they seem to have come from good sources and not as spam. It is increddibly hard to find any other references and in some cases very difficult. Some shops cite that their information comes from certain experts they list. I dont really know how to resolve this, but pedantically going around and removing all the references to any tea shop is certainly not a good idea. Usually really real link spam on tea pages is easy to notice as people add stuff to references or external links without adding any content to the page... --Iateasquirrel 12:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- It all started with me reverting what I thought were clear cases of link spam by Robi osahan (talk · contribs) and 216.99.210.13 (talk · contribs) (who are arguably the same person). In the end I also removed other links that pointed to commercial sites. Please restore if I went overboard. I personally think that websites with little substance beyond advertising blurb should not be linked from "External links". --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
FakeName
I am going to unblock FakeName. As he is not an administrator he cannot edit Alan Dershowitz anyway, but can communicate if he wishes on his talk page. A simple assertion that an article is defamatory is not a legal threat but information which is useful to us. Fred Bauder 17:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- No need. Jimbo already unblocked him. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 17:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Image:2005-0208dwarf-full.jpg
Please remember to notify the uploader when tagging images with "no license". Thue | talk 19:14, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Bot disambiguation of "continuous"
Cheers.--Commander Keane 19:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Republic of China
I don't think your unexplained rv is good wiki practice at all. Please participate in the discussion and look at the actual changes (I am not merely reverting except for the last, where Jiang is). I am making substantive changes, while you are doing exactly what the spirit of forbidding 3 reverts is meant to prevent.Moveapage 19:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
User:LettuceSalad
Hi. If you are going to block User:LettuceSalad, you should notify the user. The talk page still says they won't be blocked until further vandalism. - Tεxτurε 19:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- Dude, give a guy a minute to write something coherent when there isn't a convenient template for this situation. ;-) Consider it done. Cheers, --MarkSweep (call me collect) 19:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Coherent? Dang, I've never tried that! Um... how does it work? Oh! I know: {{coherent template}}- Tεxτurε 19:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Sleeper accounts
- User:Cool_Cat_is_a_faggot needs blocking.
- User:Cool_Cat_is_a_fat_fat needs blocking.
Thas all I got for now. --Cool Cat 20:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Sorry I got confused between accounts these two need a blocking. --Cool Cat 20:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- I deleted those pages, since the accounts don't exist. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 20:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
They do EXIST, it is called a "sleeper" please BLOCK them. Thanks. --Cool Cat 16:10, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
My mistake I did not notice the "." on the real impostoration accounts (User:Cool_Cat_is_a_faggot., User:Cool_Cat_is_a_fat_fat.) sorry for waisting your time. :) --Cool Cat 16:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- No problem, I've blocked them just now. A good way to make sure you got the account name right is to go to the user page and check if there is a "User contributions" link in the toolbox. Cheers, --MarkSweep (call me collect) 16:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
JIT compilation
You wrote: compilation to native code irrelevant (besides, modern JVMs are often faster than native compilers). Please explain how the time taken by JIT is "irrelevant". It's not free, and it has to be done every time a class is loaded for the first time in a given JVM. – Smyth\ 18:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- You have to look at the diff. Here's what it used to say:
- A number of language features unavoidably harm performance and memory usage, even if native compilation is used:
- I changed this to:
- A number of language features unavoidably harm performance:
- I never said that the time taken by a compiler (be it JIT or offline) is irrelevant. The point of the paragraph was to say that the Java language has certain features or makes certain guarantees that could be seen to impose a performance penalty. The qualification "even if native compilation is used" is a strawman: the discussion is about language features, so they apply to all compilation and runtime models. In addition, offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM. So not only is the "even if" qualification irrelevant to the discussion of array bounds checking etc., it is also misleading because it falsely suggests that offline compilation is somehow less affected. The fact is that several things have to happen at runtime (array bounds checking, byte code verification and run-time type checking for dynamic loading), and this will be true no matter what the underlying compilation or execution model is. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 20:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Alright, but how can you say that "offline native compilation typically results in much worse performance than online compilation in the JVM"? – Smyth\ 11:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
- Try it yourself. Take your favorite Java benchmark, compile it using GCJ or some other native compiler and compare that with running the bytecode on the 1.6 server VM (or even 1.5). Even if compiler technology improves, there's still a problem: separate offline compilation makes it hard to perform certain optimizations, like for example devirtualization. A JIT compiler has an inherent advantage there. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 22:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. – Smyth\ 13:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Cultures of the World
Would you consider contributing? Or how about voting for it as collaboration of the week for this new but important article.--Culturesoftheworld 19:31, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi Mark, please help
I would like to request your help with serious NPOV and verifiability problems on the Arabic numerals page. I have mentioned it, yet again, here Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette_alerts#December_17. Please help me recruit as many neutral and well-intending editors to the page to counter the strong and manifest bias. Regards, and thanks. csssclll (14:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC))
Transportation in Taiwan deserves a separate article
see Talk:Transportation in the Republic of China. Please do not revert it without an explanation.
Re: ROC vs. Taiwan
I agree that we should have some naming convention notice for taiwan-related articles. This is already done for all Korea related articles. Unfortunatly, I'm out of town for the next week or so (on borrowed internet here) so my time online is severely limited. If you can, get started. or i'll look into it later. a good number of 163.28.64.50's do seem troubling. --Jiang 03:48, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Re: Transport articles
I'm most happy to help, but I'm afraid I cannot manage to follow all these closely. :-| — Instantnood 20:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Hello Mark. You may be interested to take a look at the CfD nomination of category:newspapers of the Republic of China. — Instantnood 18:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- Should the matter be brought to the administrators' notice board? The community doesn't seem to be bothered with the NPOV policies. — Instantnood 17:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Newspapers used instead of blogs
I would like your feedback on the use of newspapers as a source instead of blogs. In the case of the Robert Clark Young article, I have found newspaper sources that cover much of the same material as the blogs that have been used in the article. When I replaced the blog sources with the newspaper sources, Alabamaboy reverted every single one of my edits. Also, very strangely, he accused me on the discussion page of being Mr. Young himself!
This is the Misplaced Pages Guideline I am trying to follow with my edits:
"Publications with teams of fact-checkers, reporters, editors, lawyers, and managers — like the New York Times or The Times of London — are likely to be reliable, and are regarded as reputable sources for the purposes of Misplaced Pages. At the other end of the reliability scale lie personal websites, weblogs (blogs), bulletin boards, and Usenet posts, which are not acceptable as sources."
Thus, I have replaced the blog sources with newspaper sources. Again, let me stress that this has not led to much change in the text of the article itself--what I'm trying to do here is change the nature of the sources so that they themselves comply with Misplaced Pages Guidelines.
Could Alabamaboy and I get some feedback on this? I wonder if you could go over to the Robert Clark Young history and compare both versions of the sourcing--the one using newspapers, and the one using blogs. Thank you. Berenise 01:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- First off, I apologize for Berenise's comment being spammed upon so many user's talk pages. However, since Berenise already placed it here I wanted you to be aware that there are three reasons the article was reverted: 1) Berenise made the changes despite a lack of consensus and my objections on the Talk:Robert Clark Young. In short, the online references are refered to in the newspaper and print articles, making the online sources primary sources. The article also has many print sources which complement and add to the online sources. 2) The edits made the article less NPOV b/c they removed opposing viewpoints. While these references may be online, they are from credible named sources who are considered experts in their respected areas. 3) There is a strong possibility that Berenise is Robert Clark Young. Young previously edited the article about himself and most of Berenise's edits since coming to Misplaced Pages have been to the Young article. I'm trying to clear this up with Berenise; once she proves she is not Young I'd love to get opinions from other editors about this situation. For full details, see Talk:Robert Clark Young.--Alabamaboy 01:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Re: Category:Ancient peoples of China
Thanks for the answer Mark. :-D — Instantnood 22:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)