Misplaced Pages

User talk:SemanticMantis: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:27, 22 June 2016 editLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,669,710 edits →Please comment on Talk:James Hopwood Jeans: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 13:32, 22 June 2016 edit undoSemanticMantis (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users9,386 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 37: Line 37:
=Newer Threads= =Newer Threads=


== Reference desk ==

Not sure what inspired rant, but it certainly wasn't anything that happened in the thread on which you commented. I suggest that you simply remove your comment and my response with it to avoid the embarrassment of people seeing your unhinged comments. I think that Meni Rosenfeld's thoughtful, carefully worded comments speak for me on the actual substance of the matter. --] (]) 16:14, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Also, on another topic: the idea that when person X pings person Y they are soliciting responses or attention from people other than person Y is seriously confused. The point of pinging someone is to solicit input or attention ''from that particular person''. Obviously. --] (]) 16:16, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

:Hi ]. No, I will leave my comment there. I also responded once more there, and then boxed it up with a neutral title because it is not relevant to OP. But I made my original comment for a reason, and that hasn't changed. I thought you deserved some public chastisement for your rude behavior. You're better than that. Any time you waste here is nobody's fault but your own. Obviously. I'm sure you're a good mathematician. Unfortunately, you seem to have absorbed some of the nastier bits of that culture, in this case, that learners should be supplicants, and that they must be deemed worthy in order to be helped, that they should kowtow to their betters, etc. I think it's unprofessional, and it gives mathematicians a bad name. Maybe that's not true for you. Maybe in person you don't sound so rude, and maybe IRL you are very good at helping low-level learners. But in text, it's hard to tell tone, and that's why we should err on the side of being nice. Of course you can continue do whatever you want; I can't stop you. Likewise, I can chastise you when I think you're doing something bad for the desks, and you can't really stop me either. I don't dislike you, I just think you have a very exclusionary approach that is bad for our reference desks. I think perhaps you're still young, and your head is filled with your elite accomplishments, and you might have some unrealistic expectations of how much someone should know or do before they ask a question here. While your ''math'' may be strong, I think you have a lot to learn still about professionalism. Good math teachers don't ask for apologies from students. Joseph, compared to many of us, is fairly ignorant (Joseph, if you happen to see this, please understand I mean that in a value neutral way). He asks all kinds of questions that betray his lack of understanding and lack of deep knowledge in many areas, including computers and math. You know what? That's ok. He's coming here to learn, he's coming here for help. You don't have to help him, and you're allowed to get annoyed by him, but if you continue to be rude to him and others, I will continue to occasionally tell you that you are out of line, if and when I see fit.

:Your second point is valid, so I will explain: I was not speaking in terms of ] or ]. Rather, I was making a guess based on ]. Pinging, as a general trend, is basically an attention-getting maneuver on WP. Anyway, now '''I''' fear I have wasted some time. If so, I have nobody to blame but myself. But if I might convince you to be a little bit nicer here or even to students in IRL, then I don't think my time is wasted :) Happy editing, ] (]) 17:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

:: Since you don't know me personally, I would suggest that you not hold forth about my personal attributes, positive or negative, nor about my IRL behavior. If you would like to have a discussion about what I or others actually wrote, that is another question. But so far your engagement has been unconnected to anything real.
:: <s>Let me help you back on a plausible track. I hold the following view: if person X wastes person Y's time by an unintentional act of foolishness, person X would do well to apologize to person Y. Do you find this view objectionable? If not, we can continue.</s> Sorry, on further thought I actually don't have any interest in having this conversation. --] (]) 17:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
:::You know what ], I owe you an apology. Your comment, on it's own, was merely ''rude'', and not ''severely inappropriate'' as I made it out to be. If my response was disproportionate to the offense, it was probably because I was reading it not in isolation, but as part a larger pattern of your comments that have seemed rude to me on other occasions. But there's lots and lots of helpful people on the math desks that are ''not'' rude, and I think you would do well to follow their model. ] (]) 18:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
:::: Thank you. --] (]) 18:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

== Please comment on ] ==

The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 44817 --> ] (]) 04:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

== Please comment on ] ==

The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 45033 --> ] (]) 04:25, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


== Lawn maintenance == == Lawn maintenance ==
Line 168: Line 147:
|} |}
::] Hey thanks! I spent a year or so hanging around an ant lab at UIUC, sometimes I wish I would/could have stayed there, because ants are just so awesome :)] (]) 17:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC) ::] Hey thanks! I spent a year or so hanging around an ant lab at UIUC, sometimes I wish I would/could have stayed there, because ants are just so awesome :)] (]) 17:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

== Please comment on ] ==

The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 47439 --> ] (]) 04:24, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

== Please comment on ] ==

The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 47617 --> ] (]) 04:25, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

== Please comment on ] ==

The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 47799 --> ] (]) 04:27, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:32, 22 June 2016

Welcome to my talk page!

Please feel free to leave any (civil) comment you like.

Please do not delete, revert, or otherwise remove anything from my talk page.
And please do not judge me for excessive typographic emphasis; recent experience has proved that my request must be made very clearly and prominently.

more about my request


List of users who have disrespected my polite request

Extended content

1: User:Elockid , who did not even give an edit summary or reason. I suspect it is thought that the post in question originated from a banned user. I suggest that removing content from my talk page is neither an urgent nor a particularly helpful task, and that Elockid's time would be better spent doing virtually anything else. In this case, I probably would have collapsed or deleted the content anyway. The point is that it's ok to let things stand on my talk page for a few minutes, especially when I've clearly asked for others not to remove content here.

2: User:Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise . The user to whom I have clearly explained, repeatedly, that I prefer to manage my own talk page.


3: User:Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise, again .


List of users whose requests I will respect

Extended content

Fut.Perf. - who has asked that I not post on his talk page. Until notified otherwise, I will not. Here is a record of the exchange, which was quickly deleted by FPAS. However, I wish to save this diff in case it proves useful in the future.

Archives

User_talk:SemanticMantis/Archive_1 through 01/21/2016


User_talk:SemanticMantis/Archive_2 1/22/2016 to 04/28/2016

Newer Threads

Lawn maintenance

-- putting this old thread back on my talk page to remind myself to work on this SemanticMantis (talk) 19:09, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Please express your thoughts on the disadvantages of lawn care as it is practiced in the United States. My request is a response to your invitation at Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#Lawn maintenance at 16:48, 4 June 2014. (I am adding your talk page to my watchlist.)
—Wavelength (talk) 19:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Wavelength, thanks for your interest! I am an ecologist, specializing in theoretical plant ecology, and turf lawns are something I've thought about quite a bit. I don't usually appeal to my own authority on WP, but I thought it would save time to let you know that I know what I'm talking about. Of course I'll be happy supply refs for any subclaims if you'd like. So, without much organization, I'll throw out my thoughts, and see what parts you're interested in.
  • Most people on the USA that own houses have turf lawns, mostly because that's what it came with, and that's all they know. Many of them spend money on fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides. Fertilizers take an enormous amount of energy to produce, through the Haber process. Then, they are often over applied, and runoff fertilizer is very bad for all of our natural ecosystems, but especially for streams, e.g. eutrophication. Herbicides applied to lawns are usually selective, in that they don't kill turf grass, but they also have their own ecological problems Herbicide#Ecological_effects.
  • Ok, but what about people who don't use fertilizers and herbicides? They still usually have a monoculture of grass, often a type that is an invasive species, or of a type that is not well adapted to local conditions. For example Kentucky bluegrass is beautiful, but it is silly to grow it in most states, because it needs extra water that native species don't. In the south, there are many bermuda grass lawns, which don't provide any resources for the local fauna. So, monocultures are generally bad, and we've replaced huge swaths of our formerly diverse suburban and rural acreage with one type of plant. Insects, birds, amphibians, and many other animals are thus displaced.
  • What if I don't care about insects and birds? (I'll even ignore how human society depends upon biodiversity and ecosystem services) Well, huge chunks of the country are naturally arid, (CA, TX, AZ, NV, etc) and simply cannot support a turf lawn without irrigation. Using potable water on grass is just silly, but millions do it anyway, even when they live in deserts, and are facing water shortages in the near future.
  • But I don't irrigate my lawn-- well, then we come to gas mowers, which in my opinion totally ruin my weekends. Even if I don't have to mess around with an expensive machine and breath its exhaust in the hot sun, I'm annoyed by all my neighbors doing it. And of course in addition to noise pollution, there are lots of other pollutants they emit as well. 4-stroke mowers aren't all that terrible, but 2-stroke weed wackers are amazingly polluting, as are most leaf blowers. By some measures, they are worse than an SUV, see e.g. String_trimmer#Power_and_emissions. So I use a Fiskars push reel mower, which I'm rather happy with.
  • After all this, I conclude the prevalence of massive turf lawns in the USA is just bad for our society. Especially the way they are commonly cared for, and in many cases, they are not even used much! I feel totally different about it if e.g. someone has many children, or grandchildren who need space to play, or if one wants space for a game of croquet or badminton. I spend tons of time in my yard... but I have many neighbors with giant lawns that never seem to use them! But we keep them, just because of a sort of cultural momentum, and thinking it's "normal", and fearing what our neighbors would think, and not knowing what else to do.
  • So, what are the alternatives? There are several, depending on the biome you live in, and what needs you have for the yard. E.g. if I lived in the band from eastern CO to western PA, and I didn't have much need for lawn play, I'd install a prairie. If I lived in CA or AZ, I'd do some sort of xeriscaping. Another key thing is that many nice urban/suburban neighborhoods have nice big trees. And here's a key concept: Trees and grasses generally don't live together, they require different environmental conditions. So, trying to get trees and grass to coexist is just ecologically unsound in a household setting (it can happen in nature, but it usually needs a frequent fire regime). So for big chunks of the USA, having a nice tree canopy, with shade-tolerant groundcover underneath is a nice solution: It takes no water, mowing or fertilizers, and will tolerate a bit of foot traffic. Of course, none of the alternatives are truly maintenance free, but they can be much lower maintenance than turf lawns, and are almost always ecologically superior if you do a little research.


Anyway, there's some of the key points that I'm happy to proselytize on :) As for my personal life, I can't practice everything I preach. I rent in TX, so I can't just convert my whole yard to non-turf. But I do use the push mower, and I've removed lots of turf around trees, and turned them into ornamental beds. This way, at least I have less grass to tend to, and use less water than if it were all grass. If you'd like some specific information on turf alternatives that might be good for your needs, just tell me roughly where you live and how much traffic/play you expect. Cheers, SemanticMantis (talk) 21:10, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your generous reply, which I have read in its entirety. All of it interests me, and I propose that the information be covered in Misplaced Pages, if it is not already. Of course, it would be with a neutral presentation of views. Here is a link to Category:Landscape. Here is a link to http://www.dmoz.org/Home/Gardening/Landscaping/.
—Wavelength (talk) 22:24, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Coverage on WP is a good idea! I'm sure a some of it is on WP (e.g. some of the links above), but it is scattered about in many places. It is hard to be neutral while still proposing that certain things are "better", especially in such a complex area. I don't really think "Why lawns should be minimized in modern society" is a very good candidate for an article :) Also, I usually only make small corrections to article space, and spend most of my WP time on the ref desk, because those are tasks I can handle in ~10-15 minute work breaks. Anyway, do you have any specific articles in mind that could use this info? I could probably find various sources to scientific publications for many of my claims above, but I'm not sure where they would fit. If you have some suggestions of what/where I should include some of the ideas, I'll listen and at least give it 15 minutes a day :) SemanticMantis (talk) 23:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
There could be a new article called "Alternative lawns" or "Alternatives to lawns" or "Lawn alternatives"; there could be a new article called "Anti-lawn movement". In searching for online sources, I found some dissenting views.
Do your work breaks allow you to develop articles gradually in a "sandbox"?
—Wavelength (talk) 20:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I think Lawn alternatives would be a good place to start. Sure, I can work on a sandbox article in small chunks. Do you want to start one in your space, or should I start one here? SemanticMantis (talk) 20:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I prefer that you start one in your user space. Later, I might improve it, preferably in article space because I prefer to avoid editing in user spaces of other editors, except their talk pages.
—Wavelength (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'll get a rough copy started and maybe ask a few others to take a look once it's presentable. Thanks for your help and encouragement! SemanticMantis (talk) 17:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
The original discussion has been archived.
Here is another external resource.
—Wavelength (talk) 00:04, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Here are a few reports like the one from which I quoted at the beginning of the discussion archived at Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2014 June 5#Lawn prohibition: Turf War : The New Yorker (July 21, 2008).
—Wavelength (talk) 01:08, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
"Food Not Lawns" is a new Misplaced Pages article.
—Wavelength (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Here is a news report about lawn maintenance for an elderly woman in Texas.
—Wavelength (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
"Tapestry lawn" is a new Misplaced Pages article.
—Wavelength (talk) 19:10, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

-- putting this old thread back on my talk page to remind myself to work on this SemanticMantis (talk) 19:09, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:YouTube

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:YouTube. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Astronomy

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Astronomy. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Area of a disk

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Area of a disk. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

consider edit

would you consider removing the word "important" from your closure comment title? I'm being a stickler but of course your comment along these lines isn't more or less important than anyone else's..it seems to be suggesting a kind of authority too..I partly state this as I do disagree with the interpretation of policy contained within the post (see my response there) so don't like the authoritative suggestion implied by the bold. Don't take this as a disrespect or a criticism of you (I'm actually a fan of your presence over at the reference desk)..68.48.241.158 (talk) 16:33, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the vote of confidence. I think it's important because there were two bolded requests for closure when I came in. I have changed it to "somewhat" important, and also changed the bolding. I do dislike even an accidental and unintended inference of appeal to authority ;) SemanticMantis (talk) 17:11, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
thanks for taking the time.68.48.241.158 (talk) 17:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)



Please comment on Talk:World Wide Web

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:World Wide Web. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


Please comment on Talk:Garden of Eden (cellular automaton)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Garden of Eden (cellular automaton). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Smartbond

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Smartbond. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Microbiology

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Microbiology. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Thanks for your comments on the RefDesk. After reading the answers about floating ants I spent 2 days on Google learning new stuff! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
User:The Quixotic Potato Hey thanks! I spent a year or so hanging around an ant lab at UIUC, sometimes I wish I would/could have stayed there, because ants are just so awesome :)SemanticMantis (talk) 17:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)