Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:42, 25 January 2007

Logical Proof of the statement "Jack the Ripper's identity has never been determined"

The statement "Jack the Ripper's identity has never been determined" is an incontrovertible logical fact. Let's examine the statement, it's strictly grammatical meaning, and it's logicality. To do this we will first examine the statement grammatically with the intention of defining it more clearly.

Jack the Ripper (English serial killer in the 19th century)'s identity (for this purpose we will just use proper name) has (third person singular present tense of have ) never (Not ever; on no occasion; at no time: He had never been there before. You never can be sure. ) been determined (To decide or settle (a dispute, for example) conclusively and authoritatively. To end or decide, as by judicial action.)

So grammatically this statement means: The English serial killer named Jack the Ripper's proper name has not ever; at no time been decided or settled conclusively and authoritatively.

Now basically to those new to logic here's a primer. An important part of logic is the for the premises to support the conclusion. We will use deductive reasoning here's the definition according to Misplaced Pages, "deductive reasoning is reasoning in which the conclusion is necessitated, or reached, by previously known facts - the premises: if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. This is as opposed to abductive and inductive reasoning, where the premises may predict a high probability of the conclusion, but do not ensure that the conclusion is true. " Now this kind of reasoning has been proven to be true through the use of mathematics, science, and real world practice. Please refer here: if you have any questions regarding deductive reasoning.

In our instance we have 3 premises and 1 conclusion:

3 premises

a) In the 19th century in England there was a serial killer known as Jack the Ripper. (true)

b) Jack the Ripper's proper name (identity) has never been decided conclusively and authoritatively. (true)

c) determined means "To decide or settle (a dispute, for example) conclusively and authoritatively. To end or decide, as by judicial action. " (true)

conclusion

d) Jack the Ripper's identity has never been determined. (true)

Therefore according to the scientifically proven logical method of deductive reasoning if a, b, and c are true and they presuppose d then d must be true. There you have it the statement "Jack the Ripper's identity has never been determined" has been proven to be a logical fact. Quadzilla99 18:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

George Butler

I noticed you've made some contributions to the George Butler article. I was searching for something else related to him and ran across a brief bio at this link; I thought you might be interested it it as a possible additional source of information: http://www.whitemountainfilms.com/bio.htm.—Chidom   21:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

ZMA

ZMA (supplement) Let me know if you are ok with the cite I added I am pretty careful on adding references as I agree with you some are way out there and if I add one I have read it from a reliable source. Thanks --Supplements 19:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

That is a review of the study done by Brilla and Conte at Western Washington Univeristy in 1999 that was already sited in the article. The review was published in October, 2000. A study may be reviewed in several Journals but it's still the same study. If you look on Pubmed there are other studies you can use to site the effectiveness of the ingredients of ZMA but the 2 studies in the article are the only 2 that I know of that were done on ZMA's actual formula. If you find anything make sure it's a new study not a summary or if it is a summary be sure to site that it is a summary. Something like this is not new research but a review of other studies which it doesn't site and not very helpful:

"Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Aug;72(2 Suppl):585S-93S. Links Magnesium, zinc, and chromium nutriture and physical activity.Lukaski HC. US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, Grand Forks, ND 58202-9034, USA. hlukaski@gfhnrc.ars.usda.gov

Magnesium, zinc, and chromium are mineral elements required in modest amounts to maintain health and optimal physiologic function. For physically active persons, adequate amounts of these micronutrients are needed in the diet to ensure the capacity for increased energy expenditure and work performance. Most physically active individuals consume diets that provide amounts of magnesium and zinc sufficient to meet population standards. Women tend to consume less of these minerals than is recommended, in part because they eat less food than men. Inadequate intakes of magnesium and zinc have been reported for participants in activities requiring restriction of body weight. Dietary chromium is difficult to estimate because of a lack of appropriate reference databases. Acute, intense activity results in short-term increases in both urine and sweat losses of minerals that apparently diminish during recovery in the days after exercise. Supplemental magnesium and zinc apparently improve strength and muscle metabolism. However, evidence is lacking as to whether these observations relate to impaired nutritional status or a pharmacologic effect. Chromium supplementation of young men and women does not promote muscle accretion, fat loss, or gains in strength. Physically active individuals with concerns about meeting guidelines for nutrient intake should be counseled to select and consume foods with high nutrient densities rather than to rely on nutritional supplements. The indiscriminate use of mineral supplements can adversely affect physiologic function and impair health.

PMID: 10919964 "

Basically the guy is just summarizing the 1999 Brilla and Conte study again when he says "Zinc and Magnesium apparently improve strength levels" although he doesn't directly reference it like the source you posted. There are several summaries of the Brilla-Conte study out there so be sure anything you site is not just a summary of it. Quadzilla99 20:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

re super bowl rosters

At some point you should put the tables into an actual HTML table (preferably using the Wiki table syntax). The tab-delineated format that you are currently using will ultimately get screwed up by an automatic Misplaced Pages bot that will think that the extra tabs are not necessary. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

World's strongest man

You could do the redirect yourself you know. In future, be bold and do it yourself. Hole in the wall 14:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I would but it says double redirect and I don't know how to bypass that. Quadzilla99 14:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Just type in - #REDIRECT ]. If it's a double redirect, find the page you want it to go to, and redirect to that. I hope that explains it. Hole in the wall 14:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks I'll give a try if I encounter the situation again. Quadzilla99 15:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Jim Thorpe edit etc.

I think your edit to the Jim Thorpe article is a good one - but I question a statement left in that his 100m record would be the longest standing record in sports history - it's kind of broad. Ernie Nevers has some records that have stood since the 1920s - and still stand. Jim Hines broke the 10 second barrier in the 100 M in 1968.

I also noticed you have an interest in sports equipment. My father, Hap Moran who played in the NFL from 1926 to 1933, used to tell a story about trying to sell tackling sleds to schools but it was an idea ahead of its time. But one of his teammates from the 1926 NFL Campionship Frankford Yellow Jackets, Rae Crowther, persevered with the idea and his company is still in business.

You might also enjoy a picture I've posted to the Jim Thorpe discussion page: Revmoran 15:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

If the statement can be verified then Ok. Usually those things sit in there with a tag for months which I don't like personally, so I think it should just go until someone provides a source. Quadzilla99 15:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Biological Value Article

I made some important changed to the biological value of protein article. Please overview. Also, please clean up the Methodology section (formely Criticisms). Thanks. 63.17.103.250 17:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Quadzilla, these same edits were applied to the section you wrote for Designer Whey Protein. Your opinion on both of these pages is needed (go there and you'll see why). Thanks! Yankees76 23:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Some help on the Biological Value article would be greatly appreciated. I'm actively asking for a third opinion, but you might be able to help. Yankees76 03:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Hakeem Olajuwon

Thank you for your contributions to the Hakeem Olajuwon article. Looking at it now the article is almost double it's former size now thanks to you. You really have done a lot of work to bring up the quality of the article. Thanks! Harvey100 01:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Flu Vaccine

Thanks for the Flu vaccine Barnstar. I was feeling down. You lifted me up. WAS 4.250 03:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem you definitely deserved it. Quadzilla99 03:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hakeem Olajuwon- GA

Alright, I'll double-check the article and add in some comments. In all honesty though I'd try submitting it to Misplaced Pages:Good articles/Candidates based on the improvements made since I rated it almost a month ago. Looks way better than I remember. --Wizardman 03:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Congrats on your recent adminship. Quadzilla99 03:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I haven't been given adminship, lol. Haven't even applied for it. I'll take that as a compliment though :). --Wizardman 03:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I misread that message on your talkpage, my bad. Quadzilla99 03:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hakeem peer review

I went and requested a peer review for Hakeem Olajuwon to see what other editors think of it. You may want to look through here periodically to see what concerns are brought up. Once that looks good you can request a good article review if you want, and if good I'll probably approve it (Since I'm part of the committee). --Wizardman 17:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Kennedy Assassination Theory

Thanks for taking the time to add the disclaimer to the theories section. I had put the {{totally disputed}} tag on the page to serve this purpose. At the time there was heavy edit warring on the page and I felt that if I added a paragraph like that it would be reverted as Original research or for some other reason. Then once the troubles died down I just forgot. Anyway, thanks. Ramsquire 18:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I shouldn't have called it a disclaimer just a clarification. Quadzilla99 19:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Designer Protein Picture

Nice job getting a pic in there - but is there any way you can remove the watermark on that image and reupload? It contains a URL to a commercial website. Cheers. Yankees76 18:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't see it I'll remove it and go find another one. Quadzilla99 19:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries, it caught my eye while I was trolling through recent changes. Alot of online stores insert their watermarks to discourage competitors from "borrowing" images to use on their own sites. Cheers. Yankees76 19:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

You're good

The MJ article looks better then other with all of those sources. Thanls! --Twlighter 18:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Good to hear some feedback it was a lot of work. Quadzilla99 18:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		I, ShadowJester07, hereby award you with the Working Man's Barnstar award for all the time and effort you spent bettering the Michael Jordan article. Thanks!  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow, my first barnstar thanks so much. Quadzilla99 21:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Somewhat redundant to the above, but I also appreciate the work that went into putting in all those references on MJ soooooo...

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For all the hard work in improving Michael Jordan! Syrthiss 12:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, it really does feel good to get some recognition when you put a lot of hard work into something. Quadzilla99 12:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

MJ Pics

Alright, cool. Would you be willing to the paste the entire contents of the e-mail on each of the image description pages. People often do this to clarify the licensing when it doesn't match up. I have one more question, the flickr page for Image:MJAwards.jpg states that the author does not allow for derivative works. However, Misplaced Pages requires this. Do you know if the author is willing to make an exception for that image? Also, the author should be made aware that images aren't allowed for WP use only as it makes it difficult for forks, so any image released by the owner under a CC license must be ok to use on sites besides WP. Thanks and keep up the good work. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 01:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure I'm still waiting on an email for the one in the portait box. Quadzilla99 01:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I switched images on the article to Image:Michael Jordan UNC Jersey cropped.jpg. The reason why I did this was because I figured this sort of image should be on the commons anyway. And since I had to upload it anyway, I decided I might as well raise the resolution while I was at it. Anyway, you might want to consider uploading future images directly to the Commons so that they can be used by all Wikimedia projects. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 08:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure no problem, thanks for upgrading the resolution. Quadzilla99 08:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright thanks. I just left a message for Joshua Massel. I wanted to get clarification on which specific license he wanted to use. I know I am kind of strict about the whole license thing, but that is because I want to make sure none of the flickr users get left with a bad taste in their mouth over any miscommunication. Another note: I personally don't drop the resolution too much for uploaded pictures which allows people to view the full size version of the image at the highest quality if they choose. Wikimedia software automatically makes the file size smaller for the article, so there usually isn't much of a difference when only viewing the article. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 08:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a big photo buff, assuming he gives you the correct license, when you crop it can you affect the brightness of the photo slightly also? It's pretty shadowy currently. Quadzilla99 08:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I usually just open it in Photoshop and run the auto contrast/brightness/etc filters and if it looks better than before, I save the changes. That is about the extent of my ability, but I'll give it ago. I've been so busy focusing with licenses, that I haven't even looked at how much the MJ article has improved. Great work on bring two articles up to GA status. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 08:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Well MJ hasn't passed GAR yet (he types with crossed fingers) but thanks a lot. Quadzilla99 08:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:"MJ".jpg looks great. Is there any reason you want to keep Image:MJ6.jpg or Image:MJ7.jpg on the servers? If not, I'll delete them for you. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 20:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW, Joshua messaged me back on flickr and he is more than happy to change it to the license. I'm not sure if he is going to choose CC-BY-2.0 or CC-BY-SA-2.0, so I haven't made any changes yet. I just wanted to let you know that we are good there. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help PS2pcGAMER and thanks for deleting the redundant photos I mistakenly created. Quadzilla99 12:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For all your hard work in bringing Hakeem Olajuwon up to Good Article status I award you this Barnstar. Keep up the good work. Harvey100 14:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Harvey and I agree with your Hakeem comments on your user page. However if you keep your user page the way it is now I would suggest not editing the Dirk Nowitzki article anytime soon lol. Quadzilla99 12:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Georg Cantor

I have removed the tag from this article. It has plenty of references. If you have concerns over particular details, please put a {{fact}} tag against them; a comment on the talk page might be useful.--Runcorn 22:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The article has total of zero inline citations as of now and merely 2 notes. Quadzilla99 03:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Citing sources

I responded to your comment there. Christopher Parham (talk) 08:02, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding CB-4.jpg

Thanks for uploading the file CB-4.jpg. I see you got the image from Flickr. The tag you gave the image was not the same as it was on Flickr, luckily, the tag on Flickr was still a free on. In the future, if you stumble upon an encyclopedic image on Flickr, please upload it to the Commons. Images uploaded at the Commons are available to all Wikimedia projects, not just en.wikipedia.org. Also, you did not upload the full resolution image. On the Flickr page, please click the all sizes button and use the highest resolution available. I have moved this image to the Commons with the higher resolution image. In a few days, the image you uploaded here at en.wiki will be deleted but all your links to the image will automatically be switched to the image at the Commons. Once again, thanks for the great upload. If you have any questions, let me know.--NMajdan•talk 15:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. I knew it was good because you can sort by Creative Commons images that are allowed to be used commercially and altered at flickr, just put the wrong tag on it. Quadzilla99 15:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:Looney Tunes

Alright, I added the needed fields. Thanks for the heads up. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  19:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Quadzilla99 20:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Toni Kukoc.jpg

Hi. I just saw you uploaded this image. Free images should be uploaded to commons, especially if they are from Flickr. Commons is setup to handle these images better than Misplaced Pages, as they have a flickr review process that can verify the image license and protect it better. Commons images can be used on Misplaced Pages (and all other MetaWiki sites!) just like they were uploaded here. Thanks! --MECU≈talk 16:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Fully aware of that. Quadzilla99 19:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Kind word at the right time

thanks for your kind words, about WP:LAME. It really came just at the right time. I am currently in the middle of a really nasty edit war, which involves Bridgestone employees editing wikipedia. I need those words of encouragement right now, you made my day :). Travb (talk) 19:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Jeopardy!

Thanks for adding the {{toolong}} tag to the Jeopardy! article, but you might want to read the talk page for the article first; you'll see that this issue has been discussed. If you can think of ways to improve the article by splitting off sections, please give it a shot. Robert K S 20:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

It's 60kb and after reading the talk page I see no reason why the tag would need to be removed until it gets shorter. Quadzilla99 20:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Here's one reason. The tag makes it longer. By adding the tag, you're not solving the problem. The issue has been discussed, so it's not solving the problem. Robert K S 20:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The tag puts in a category which identifies it for other editors. Quadzilla99

The tag's been up for months at a time in the past, and it hasn't solved the problem. Robert K S 20:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Compromise we'll put the tag on the talk page, Ok? Quadzilla99 20:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

That will serve to still identify it for fellow editors. Quadzilla99 20:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Lyme disease GAC

Hi there. I've moved Lyme disease's Good Article candidacy entry from the Natural Sciences section to the Medicine section, as I believe it's more appropriate. I hope you don't mind; if you do, feel free to move it back. Regards, Fvasconcellos 14:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I was wondering which of those two sections to put it under which ever works best is fine. Quadzilla99 14:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for taking the time to review my contributions and contribute to my RfA. I withdrew when it became clear that the uphill climb had crossed the snowball threshold, but I appreciate your feedback and the process gave me some good ideas for other ways I can be contributing to Misplaced Pages. I'll work on the areas that came up in the discussion, and try again after I've gained wider experience. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem and thanks for being open to advice. Quadzilla99 17:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Toni Kukoc

Quad, thanks for the CCA photo of Kuki; it's much appreciated. Damir 11:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure no problem. Quadzilla99 12:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)