User talk:The Anome

I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existent articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.

I encourage you to vote on the current Collaboration of the Week, because I'm very interested in which articles you think need to be written or added to, and because I understand that I cannot do the enormous amount of work required on some of the Math stubs alone. I'm asking for your help, and also your critiques on the way the portal is set up.

Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page, or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Math CotW

If you wanted to vote for Tensor as the CotW, you should sign your name- those who nominate the article are allowed to vote as well. Also, check out the argument on Tensors v. Tensor Densities. ral315 15:52, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Rienzo

Rienzo is still editing under further sockpuppets User:65.161.65.104, User:MahBoys, and User:Sandor, and User:130.236.84.134.

This is in violation of a 3 month ban from the arbitration comittee - Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rienzo

I would appreciate an immediate block of these accounts. CheeseDreams 14:51, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Reverting Talk:Calendars of 2005

I noticed that you reverted the deleted section. I understand why you did it, but I did post a proposal in that section for the section to be deleted. I may delete it myself if there is an agreement among the other "frequent editors" of the Calendars. --Munchkinguy 18:16, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

pennies

Hello. Just saw your edit at Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/February 15. Thanks.
On Decimal Day, it says "...effectively increasing all coins' value by a factor 2.4, ..." Is that wrong, too ? Just curious ...
-- PFHLai 09:43, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)

That bit is really about Maundy money, a rather special case. I've rewritten that part of the article to make it clearer. -- The Anome 09:54, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. -- PFHLai 10:08, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)

[edit]

Quotes

Anome, could you explain to me your preference for colons to indent quotations and not blockquote? In the past, I've had people delete my colon-indented quotes, and replace them with blockquotes, on the grounds that using colons is "bad HMTL". One explanation was that if Wikipedia ever wants to change the way indented quotes look throughout the encyclopedia, they won't be able to do that if people use colons to identify them. However, you seem to prefer the colons. Any light you can shed on this for me, and how to "nest" the blockquotes properly, would be much appreciated, as I'd like to learn how to do it properly. Best, SlimVirgin 00:06, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

Who would those people be? Wikipedia is not written in HTML. -- The Anome 00:08, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Template not child-safe

Please reconsider what you are doing; whilst I understand and sympathise with your motives, you are going against the consensus developed on the mailing list that the information needed for downstream content selection should be possible to obtain from category information, not templates. For example, the category "Sexology" might be a clue here that some people might not want their children to have access to this article. Similarly, images can be assigned to categories relating to explicit sexual or violent content, allowing downstream filtering policies to be implemented in terms of these labels. This also solves the image inlining/linking problem. In this way, adults can see a fully uncensored Wikipedia without extraneous templates, whilst still allowing appropriately filtered content to be generated for children as soon as we have the filtering software ready.

Does that mean, I will be able to filter whole categories? I find a lot of text unfit for children too.--J heisenberg 12:24, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Indeed it should. That way, it's a win-win for advocates of both uncensored material for adults, and censored material for children. However, we should not label images or text as "child-safe" or otherwise; we should instead label them with the topics they belong to, and allow the construction of filtering policies to be decoupled from the labelling of content. Instead of labelling content now, please devote some thought to the classes of content that should be labelled: sex and violence are the most commonly cited, and clearly many people feel differently about text, images and other media.

For example, many people who might want to read an article about decapitation might not want to see a picture of one, still less a video. However, would a picture of a fictional decapitation from a movie be in the same category? Similarly, context matters. Is a medical drawing of a breast identical in content to a photograph of one? Would it be appropriate in the breast article, but not in the Janet Jackson article? How about an image of a bare-breasted public sculpture? How about a medical image of diseased or malformed genitalia, which would be quite appropriate for an article on that subject, but highly offensive to most people elsewhere? If images are potentially offensive, should they be linked, with a warning text, or simply inlined? And so on, and so forth. Content filtering is easy at first sight, but hard when you look at in in detail.

At the moment, we have consensus between the pro-censors and anti-censors to go for a labelling and software filtering solution that is policy-neutral. Please join us on the mailing list to discuss this in more detail. -- The Anome 12:39, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

... consensus developed on the mailing list that the information needed for downstream content selection should be possible to obtain from category information, not templates.

Why is there than a "morbid warning" tag?--J heisenberg 12:28, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That's the first I've heard of it. Are we going to pretend to our children that death does not exist? Oh dear, oh dear. Back we go to the mailing list, then. -- The Anome 12:39, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

Since there is a strong consensus on the policy, I'll put it on vote for deletion. BTW, I don't use news-readers a lot. Is there a place on the web to read the mailing list?--J heisenberg 12:45, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Indeed there is: see http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l and http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-February/thread.html in particular.

Just to demonstrate the problems with "morbid": should we put all articles on armed forces, battles, warcraft and weapons under the "morbid" tag? Perhaps we delete all history articles referring to killing, or famine, or plague? And that's the Holocaust and genocide articles gone, too. And similarly many other things that should be required reading in schools to learn about the evils of the past. -- The Anome 12:53, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Please don't revert w/o talk page participation

Please see Talk:Rape#.22Trolling.22_accusation. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 14:38, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

thanks

for rollback on 68.79.59.42 -- I was starting to go through each edit looking to see if any were valid (ugh). Best regards, Antandrus 18:11, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Why was link to Bukkake.com removed?

Hi-

There many legitimate reasons for an external link to Bukkake.com to be included on the wiki page "bukkake".

It is completely appropriate for the topic. Yes, there are adult advertisements on the site, but "bukkake" is a word with adult connotations. Unless the goal of wikipedia is misrepresentation of the true definition of this topic, it should be included.

I have laid out the resons for this several times:

On the "bukkake" talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bukkake

And also on the talk page of someone who removed the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Elf-friend#Hi.2C_why_did_you_delete_the_link_to_Bukkake.com_on_wiki_page_.22Bukkake.22.3F

What are your thoughts?

Currently, I'm wondering why you are so insistent on adding a link to this particular site to the article, in spite of the fact that it is repeatedly removed by other editors. Do you have a financial relationship to this website? -- The Anome 07:53, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

warning about "misleading edit summary"

There is currently no rule against using a misleading edit summary which means it is allowed. VonBluvens 12:16, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's a diagnostic sign that what you are doing is deliberate article vandalism, which is against the rules. -- The Anome 15:45, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

astronomy

Seems you removed "Polarization of light" as a link to or from Astronomy, but it is very important in astronomy. Suggest you restore link Polarization of starlight was first found by Jesse Greenstein about 1948 and led to understanding of interstellar magnetic fields. It is an important diagnostic for radiation from active galaxies and quasars, accretion disks, and so on Pdn 13:56, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polarization_of_light&action=history) for evidence that. until I created it as a redirect for an item in the requests page, "polarization of light" didn't link anywhere. It's also clear to me that the correct link for "Polarization of light" should be polarization, since that's the article that discusses the polarization of light. Instead of accusing me of things I didn't do, why not create an article at polarization of starlight yourself? -- The Anome 15:30, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

I've now created polarization of starlight as a substub. You'll probably want to fill it in. -- The Anome 15:34, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

Your (or someone's) latest try at polarization in astronomy mixed up coherent and incoherent radiation. For coherent radiation we require an overpopulation in the upper state, which therefore needs to be "pumped" by some process. In synchrotron radiation, electrons are accelerated by a variety of processes usually involving waves, shocks, turbulence, or magnetic field annihilation, but none of these tends to produce an overpopulation in a higher energy state; indeed, the particle spectra slope smoothly downwards with increasing energy. If this is confusing, think of coherent emission as being due to stimulated emission, which it is, and think of the whole process like old Fibber McGee's closet, or a set of dominoes or house of cards set up to collapse. Somebody has to stuff the top of the closet, or set up the dominoes or the cards. For masers there is another radiation field that does it (the "pump") but for synchrotron radiation and probably for most pulsars, no such thing. Perhaps instead of editing based on assumptions you might consider putting the page up on some request list for improvement (assuming you put in that stuff on "coherent" radiation.) But thanks for your interest and reorganizations. Pdn 16:42, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

List of Latin legal phrases / List of legal Latin terms

Many thanks for your exceptionally speedy merge! Six minutes must be some sort of record...

I was a little intrigued by your edit comment "merged the two lists programmatically" - which program? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:57, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A little Python program which took about two minutes to write, namely:

import string, re

data1 = """
[[[Put]], [[all of your]], [[various]]
[[Content]] - ''[[etc]]''
* [[here]]
"""

tags = re.findall(r"\[\[(.*?)\]\]", data1)
tags = map(string.lower, tags) # optional lowercasing
tags = {}.fromkeys(tags, 1).keys() # get rid of duplicates
tags.sort()

# Print nicely formatted
ch = ""
for t in tags:
   nch = t[0]
   if nch != ch:
       print
       print "== %s ==" % string.upper(nch)
       ch = nch
   print "''[[%s]]'' -" % t

-- The Anome 14:03, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

Well, thanks again. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:29, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

New Mathematics Project Participants List

Hello The Anome.

In case you didn't follow the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Reformat of Participants list, I'm writing to you to let you know that I've converted the "WikiProject Mathematics Participants List" into a table. It is now alphabetical, includes links to the participant's talk page and contribution list, and has a field for "Areas of Interest". Since your name is on the list, I thought you might want to check and/or update your entry.

Regards, Paul August ☎ 23:12, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Diacritics

Hi & thanks for your explanation on diacritics. The template is a good idea, I'm now trying to find the Hungary-related articles to add the template. -- Alensha 14:04, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

In the news

Why is the shooting on the top when there's a newer item at the bottom of the list of news item and a flag from the second item pictured? Mgm|^(talk) 10:09, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Death

What happens to humans after death?

Second is the question of what, if anything, happens, especially to humans, during and after death (or "once dead", thinking of death as a permanent state). Such questions are of long standing, and belief in an afterlife is common and ancient (see underworld). For many, belief in and information about an afterlife is a consolation in connection with the death of a beloved one or the prospect of one's own death. On the other hand, fear of hell or other negative consequences may make death worse. Human contemplation about death is an important motivation for the development of organized religion.

Many anthropologists feel that the careful burials among Homo neanderthalensis, where ornamented bodies were laid in carefully dug, flower-strewn graves, is evidence of early belief in an afterlife.(I removed this because it doen't belong in either death or this subsection. also, other species bury their dead. It belongs in some history or anthopology type article)

While there is increasing modern study on the afterlife, acceptance of its existence or of its non-existence continues to be a matter of belief for most people. (I removed this because there is NO study of afterlife. What is the experiment? How can it be proved to relate to afterlife? What is the scientific definition of aftyerlife? what are the measurment units?)

Traditions exist across most cultures to mourn the death of loved ones.(And this belongs in "What happens to humans after death"? Why? After death people might mourn you?)4.250.168.50 10:19, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think you'll find that I restored that section, after another editor removed it. -- The Anome 10:30, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Lemmy and ELP

You are d*** right that ELP weren't minor (they are still prob my fav supergroup ever and were the earliest records I bought and still listen to them!) I recall that when I added the line to Lemmy it didn't read like they were minor, but checking now all looks well ... --Vamp:Willow 11:03, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! -- The Anome 11:04, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

and thanks for the heads-up too. The info came from an on-screen interview on the BBC with Keith where he was talking about the screwdriver and Lemmy came up and said "you want to use something serious ... like this knife", sticking an ex-Nazi knife into the keyboard! I was reminded of the Crocodile Dundee clip about 'call that a knife - THIS is a knife' ;-P --Vamp:Willow 11:07, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Various comments moved here from user page

My point is that HIV tests are designed to confirm that HIV infection is NOT present. A positive ELISA is very common in healthy blood donors and army recruits - about 1% at any time - and usually reverts to negative in several months because most of these are "false" positives. The use of Western blot is controversial because 20% of ELISA negative blood donors have at least one WB band -- (Anonymous poster)

Hi I did not see your reply on polarization here - just a note on my own page. I'll take (an unpolarized) peek at Polarization of starlight. But that is a tiny part of the story. They've observed polarization of quasars, other radio sources, and even the cosmic microwave background. Pdn 02:52, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hello again I fixed some stuff. Hiltner and Hall discovered the polarization of starlight in 1949. Hiltner then explained it as scattering off grains aligned by the magnetic field, but could not determine the direction of the field. Leverett Davis Jr (my thesis adviser) and Jesse Greenstein added theoretical work to allow such determination.

I removed the stuff about quasars etc. The radiation from these other sources is not starlight! It is a big subject I do not have time to write about. The Astronomy index page does not even refer to quasars!

Pdn 03:25, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your nomination of the page for a collaboration. I did not vote for that because it is not clear to me that a lot more information in this page might better be put separately under active galaxies, interstellar matter, interstellar or galactic magnetic fields, and pulsars. The page could become a sort of hodge-podge or even a Hodge-podge ([2] (http://www.fathom.com/contributors/4574.html)). Seems to me that the fact that synchrotron radiation is prominent in radio galaxies ought to be mentioned on the page for synchrotron radiation, and that the page on radio galaxies needs work more than a specialized page on polarization. Polarization has, however, also been observed in radiation from the Sun; even circularly polarized radiation was found by Roger Angel and John Darlington Landstreet in about 1974, and if I get round to it I'll put that up on the polarization page. The page on polarization itself is too mathematical and lacks description of common laboratory components for altering states of polarization, such as quarter-wave and half-wave plates. It also repeats the errors in the page "polarization in astronomy" and I'll try to fix that soon. It fails to mention that many migratory birds navigate by use of the polarization of light from the sky. (see [3] (http://fsc.fernbank.edu/Birding/migration/migration.htm)). Pdn 21:30, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) Oops, the page on polarization does mention use by animals. Sorry, I searched the very long page for "birds" and found nary a peep, but there is mention of bees and pigeons. The writing does suggest, however, that the plane of polarization is that of the electric vector, which is natural from a physics standpoint, but, I believe, is wrong from an historical and definitional standpoint, due to the fact that early on, scientists did not know which plane (for plane polarized light) was that of the electric and which that of the magnetic vector. Nowadays they use the electric vector so I will ignore this point of uncertain history. Pdn 21:55, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) Pdn 02:32, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Body Language Plagerism

I have never seen the website that I am being accused of plagerising. I wrote that information over five years ago for research I was doing on the book, Blind to the Molesting Hands. Feel free to delete it if you think I have cut and pasted from a website that I have never even seen. Regards,--TracyRenee 10:16, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

JPII

I appreciate your work on reformatting Pope John Paul II, but there's nothing wrong with left-aligned pictures. As it is now, the layout's rather boring and static. Also, there was discussion on the top picture, which came out against using the newer picture at the top: Talk:Pope John Paul II#On Article Pictures —Brent Dax 20:51, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Re: Melissa Fahn Biography

Anome- I did in fact write it myself, but it was approved by Melissa Fahn and any editing of it would be adding things that aren't true or verified. Melissa trusts me to keep information about her on the web accurate, and I stand by what I say, I will edit it if I see any changes. I wrote it and I have that right as this is, as you said yourself, an openly editable site. Melissa trusts me to keep what she tells me as what is accurate about her and I won't let people maniacally editing my writing stop that. I'll just keep editing it back. I wouldn't have even joined if not for changing what was already here to keep that very promise. I won't be scared away and I won't break my promise to her.

-Millebaci

If it's going to be such a hassle for me to simply request that one section of the article not be edited, then I will remove it and anything else I contributed to that page and if I see anything from my site on there without my permission or any republishing of information from my website without permission, you'll see me again. I'm really not in the mood to be told what to do by someone I don't even know.

After our discussion last night, I have decided that I no longer want the text from my site to be on the page, if someone wants to write their own biography, they can, whatever, but I do not want what is there, which is (sorry, changing a few words to "wikify" it does not change who wrote it)mine and if you don't remove it, well, it's copywritten text up without permission and that can get hairy, can't it. Please have it removed immediately.

Good day. -millebaci

How would it "get hairy"? You have already stated that you are the copyright owner, and have already granted permission for Wikipedia, and any downstream users, to use your copyrighted content under the terms of the GFDL irrevocably and in perpetuity. Other people are now entitled to derive and publish derivative works under the GFDL, providing they also abide by the terms of the licence. You now cannot revoke that permission retroactively: please read the terms of the GFDL, and perhaps a book on copyright law might help. -- The Anome 19:08, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

142.163.249.114

I've just blocked 142.163.249.114 (talk · contributions) for 24 hours (my first block...). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:55, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my typos/links in the Dworkin article; I'm new and was careless there.

[edit]

Re: PEEK and POKE

Hey, we've gotta discuss this! Stop Stop Stop! --Wernher 01:00, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'm here. My line on this is: PEEK and POKE are two sides of the same coin, and need to be merged into a single article. I'm therefore creating/cleaning up the needed disambig pages. -- The Anome 01:03, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

Do you want me to finish tidying, or what? -- The Anome 01:07, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

Well, oh well. After having calmed down and thought about it a little, I actually came to the same conclusion as you did---so please feel free to go ahead sorting out the dbl redirects etc. I will do my part as well. Thanks for answering my "distress call", anyway. :-) --Wernher 01:16, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've done a bit of link-tidying and dbl redirect fixing. Think it's reasonably OK by now. --Wernher 01:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

External Links

Many thanks for giving me that information. I had never heard of external link spamming before you brought it up.

Regards, --TracyRenee 10:25, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Greetings

Not all Lancaster's are named for the English city. Some are named after their founders that established them... like the California and Texas cities.--Anon 07:17, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know: could you possibly split the disambiguation page to reflect that? -- The Anome 08:17, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Your bot...

... could be used in maybe transwiking PD images to the commons or uploading PD images from government sites... -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:17, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

discussion or mediation

Please see request for point by point discussion or request for mediation in Opus Dei article. Oh well Seems like a moron to me... Lafem 11:50, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

grammatical error in boilerplate

The standard Wiki warning sign says: "The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article is disputed." which is bad English. The subject is plural, so it should read "The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article are disputed." I do not know where to find this item and I may not have the permission to correct it so I report it to you as admin-person. Pdn 11:35, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

FIPS/Chile

Regions of Chile are the last ones in South America that do not follow "local-name uppercase-entityname" to move I need support, because I have to go to WP:RM - would you support me? Already 116 subdivion sets follow this naming scheme: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Subnational_entities/Naming (called "X English") Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:25, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please add new comments to the bottom of this page.

Moved old talk to

[edit]

New Mathematics Wikiportal

I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existant articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.

Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page, or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Math CotW

[edit]

Rienzo

Rienzo is still editing under further sockpuppets User:65.161.65.104, User:MahBoys, and User:Sandor, and User:130.236.84.134.

This is in violation of a 3 month ban from the arbitration comittee - Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rienzo

I would appreciate an immediate block of these accounts. CheeseDreams 14:51, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Reverting Talk:Calendars of 2005

[edit]

pennies

That bit is really about Maundy money, a rather special case. I've rewritten that part of the article to make it clearer. -- The Anome 09:54, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. -- PFHLai 10:08, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)

[edit]

Quotes

Who would those people be? Wikipedia is not written in HTML. -- The Anome 00:08, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Template not child-safe

Does that mean, I will be able to filter whole categories? I find a lot of text unfit for children too.--J heisenberg 12:24, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

... consensus developed on the mailing list that the information needed for downstream content selection should be possible to obtain from category information, not templates.

Why is there than a "morbid warning" tag?--J heisenberg 12:28, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That's the first I've heard of it. Are we going to pretend to our children that death does not exist? Oh dear, oh dear. Back we go to the mailing list, then. -- The Anome 12:39, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

Indeed there is: see http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l and http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-February/thread.html in particular.

[edit]

Please don't revert w/o talk page participation

Please see Talk:Rape#.22Trolling.22_accusation. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 14:38, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

thanks

for rollback on 68.79.59.42 -- I was starting to go through each edit looking to see if any were valid (ugh). Best regards, Antandrus 18:11, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Why was link to Bukkake.com removed?

Hi-

There many legitimate reasons for an external link to Bukkake.com to be included on the wiki page "bukkake".

I have laid out the resons for this several times:

On the "bukkake" talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bukkake

And also on the talk page of someone who removed the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Elf-friend#Hi.2C_why_did_you_delete_the_link_to_Bukkake.com_on_wiki_page_.22Bukkake.22.3F

What are your thoughts?

[edit]

warning about "misleading edit summary"

There is currently no rule against using a misleading edit summary which means it is allowed. VonBluvens 12:16, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's a diagnostic sign that what you are doing is deliberate article vandalism, which is against the rules. -- The Anome 15:45, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

astronomy

See [4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polarization_of_light&action=history) for evidence that. until I created it as a redirect for an item in the requests page, "polarization of light" didn't link anywhere. It's also clear to me that the correct link for "Polarization of light" should be polarization, since that's the article that discusses the polarization of light. Instead of accusing me of things I didn't do, why not create an article at polarization of starlight yourself? -- The Anome 15:30, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

I've now created polarization of starlight as a substub. You'll probably want to fill it in. -- The Anome 15:34, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

List of Latin legal phrases / List of legal Latin terms

Many thanks for your exceptionally speedy merge! Six minutes must be some sort of record...

I was a little intrigued by your edit comment "merged the two lists programmatically" - which program? -- ALoan (Talk) 13:57, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A little Python program which took about two minutes to write, namely:

import string, re

data1 = """
[[[Put]], [[all of your]], [[various]]
[[Content]] - ''[[etc]]''
* [[here]]
"""

tags = re.findall(r"\[\[(.*?)\]\]", data1)
tags = map(string.lower, tags) # optional lowercasing
tags = {}.fromkeys(tags, 1).keys() # get rid of duplicates
tags.sort()

# Print nicely formatted
ch = ""
for t in tags:
   nch = t[0]
   if nch != ch:
       print
       print "== %s ==" % string.upper(nch)
       ch = nch
   print "''[[%s]]'' -" % t

-- The Anome 14:03, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

Well, thanks again. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:29, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

New Mathematics Project Participants List

Hello The Anome.

Regards, Paul August ☎ 23:12, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Diacritics

Hi & thanks for your explanation on diacritics. The template is a good idea, I'm now trying to find the Hungary-related articles to add the template. -- Alensha 14:04, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

In the news

Why is the shooting on the top when there's a newer item at the bottom of the list of news item and a flag from the second item pictured? Mgm|^(talk) 10:09, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Death

What happens to humans after death?

I think you'll find that I restored that section, after another editor removed it. -- The Anome 10:30, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Lemmy and ELP

Thanks for checking! -- The Anome 11:04, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Various comments moved here from user page

Pdn 03:25, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your nomination of the page for a collaboration. I did not vote for that because it is not clear to me that a lot more information in this page might better be put separately under active galaxies, interstellar matter, interstellar or galactic magnetic fields, and pulsars. The page could become a sort of hodge-podge or even a Hodge-podge ([5] (http://www.fathom.com/contributors/4574.html)). Seems to me that the fact that synchrotron radiation is prominent in radio galaxies ought to be mentioned on the page for synchrotron radiation, and that the page on radio galaxies needs work more than a specialized page on polarization. Polarization has, however, also been observed in radiation from the Sun; even circularly polarized radiation was found by Roger Angel and John Darlington Landstreet in about 1974, and if I get round to it I'll put that up on the polarization page. The page on polarization itself is too mathematical and lacks description of common laboratory components for altering states of polarization, such as quarter-wave and half-wave plates. It also repeats the errors in the page "polarization in astronomy" and I'll try to fix that soon. It fails to mention that many migratory birds navigate by use of the polarization of light from the sky. (see [6] (http://fsc.fernbank.edu/Birding/migration/migration.htm)). Pdn 21:30, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) Oops, the page on polarization does mention use by animals. Sorry, I searched the very long page for "birds" and found nary a peep, but there is mention of bees and pigeons. The writing does suggest, however, that the plane of polarization is that of the electric vector, which is natural from a physics standpoint, but, I believe, is wrong from an historical and definitional standpoint, due to the fact that early on, scientists did not know which plane (for plane polarized light) was that of the electric and which that of the magnetic vector. Nowadays they use the electric vector so I will ignore this point of uncertain history. Pdn 21:55, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) Pdn 02:32, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Body Language Plagerism

[edit]

JPII

[edit]

Re: Melissa Fahn Biography

-Millebaci

Good day. -millebaci

[edit]

142.163.249.114

I've just blocked 142.163.249.114 (talk · contributions) for 24 hours (my first block...). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:55, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my typos/links in the Dworkin article; I'm new and was careless there.

[edit]

Re: PEEK and POKE

Hey, we've gotta discuss this! Stop Stop Stop! --Wernher 01:00, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Do you want me to finish tidying, or what? -- The Anome 01:07, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

I've done a bit of link-tidying and dbl redirect fixing. Think it's reasonably OK by now. --Wernher 01:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

External Links

Many thanks for giving me that information. I had never heard of external link spamming before you brought it up.

Regards, --TracyRenee 10:25, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Greetings

Not all Lancaster's are named for the English city. Some are named after their founders that established them... like the California and Texas cities.--Anon 07:17, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know: could you possibly split the disambiguation page to reflect that? -- The Anome 08:17, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Your bot...

... could be used in maybe transwiking PD images to the commons or uploading PD images from government sites... -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:17, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

discussion or mediation

Please see request for point by point discussion or request for mediation in Opus Dei article. Oh well Seems like a moron to me... Lafem 11:50, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

grammatical error in boilerplate

The standard Wiki warning sign says: "The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article is disputed," which is bad English. The subject is plural, so it should read "The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article are disputed." I do not know where to find this item and I may not have the permission to correct it so I report it to you as admin-person. Pdn 11:35, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

FIPS/Chile

[edit]

continued abuse is likely to result in escalated response???

15 mins is really going to solve the problem

Well, we can block you for more than 15 minutes if you like: done. -- The Anome 19:48, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

James Dobson article categorization

Hi, I removed the categorization because the category didn't actually exist at the time. Once someone creates it and populates it with sufficient articles then its reasonable to include it. I cast no aspersions as to its appropriateness to the subject but I suspect that once made, the creator might have a VfD on their hands. I'd suggest an alternate name, perhaps Category:Corporal punishment advocates instead.--Hooperbloob 15:21, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

However, work with me, I'm trying here for a suitable category for the type of person who advocates the corporal punishment of small children. Hence, my opting for something neutral and descriptive, as per my comments in your talk page. What possible objection do you think there could be in characterising him as such, if this is, as appears to be the case from his own writings, a true reflection of his beliefs? -- The Anome 15:34, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Well, the category as currently named, doesn't express the notion of corporal punishment as such. From the discussions I'm seeing on the VfD page I think the current name will get flagged as POV. I could be wrong but the name strikes me as pretty loaded. I'll leave it up to you and just watch what happens from the sidelines :) --Hooperbloob 15:54, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Corporal punishment is (at its lowest level) about beating people, and works its way up through progressively greater levels of violence. Since I don't think Mr. Dobson advocates the more extreme forms of corporal punishment listed under our corporal punishment rubric, surely it's only reasonable to use the more moderate name? -- The Anome 16:21, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

FIPS codes

I wasn't editing down that end (only by sections) so I presume this was the simultaneous editing of long pages bug giving repeated sections. Will try my best to fix. –Hajor 20:54, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Regions of Chile

Regions of Chile are on WP:RM. That means now there is voting to make them conforming to article names of subnational entities in whole in South America. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:11, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Fusor tubes

I'd like to move the article Farnsworth-Hirsch Fusor to something more generic, like just Fusor or Fusor tube or something, since I plan to expand on it and include all the history, like Langmuir and Elmore, and the more recent stuff by Bussard and whoever. Good idea? See Talk:Farnsworth-Hirsch_Fusor#updates - Omegatron 13:49, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Glamour

Thanks for the disambig on glamour - I thought of creating one but had to put it off until this afternoon and you beat me to it! Onlyemarie 17:24, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Thanks

Imitation isn't always the sincerest form of flattery. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:59, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

identity wrong?

WRT "(rm "mistaken identity" story -- can't find any press corroboration: what was the source?)" I googled and apparently American and Afgan officials are firm they found who they said they found, while some European (French !!) "experts" are saying they don't believe it. Do Intelligence officials lie? yes. Do the euopeans offer PROOF? NO. Is the debate worth including in the Wiki article. I chose not to. A few days should provide more clarity. Meanwhile, the people who actually have him in custody say "no mistake in identity" 4.250.168.217 09:16, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Yep. Until this story can be stood up, it's speculation. I agree that intelligence officials are not necessarily reliable sources, but nor is anyone else in this case, not even the arrested person himself. NPOV is your friend here: do these "experts" have names, citable references, and reasons why their opinions might be more than speculation? -- The Anome 12:38, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Removal of items from ITN

Regarding your removal of items from ITN (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AIn_the_news&diff=13424382&oldid=13418683): Perhaps you should do a cursory look at the page history (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AIn_the_news&diff=13414433&oldid=13414326) or the news (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1602568,00.html) before reverting to the incorrect version with the edit summary, "�can't find any press corroboration"? Warmest regards --Neutrality^talk 16:28, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

ECT

...but can you name some countries where ECT is outlawed, with cites, please, to support the other part of the sentence?

Yeah, I'm working on that. One of those things where I know it is, but not the where.

MSTCrow 02:35, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Contravariant/Covariant

The entry Contravariant has a notice: "This article should be merged into covariant transformation. If you disagree with this request, please discuss it on the article's talk page." I very much disagree. I wrote something on the discussion page but the notice is still there, so here I go.

The term covariant has two very different meanings. In relativity theory (and probably differential geometry) it refers to the invariance of a quantity (generally a measurable one) when coordinates are changed, including changes among relatively moving reference frames. For example, the velocity of light is covariant, and the rest mass of an object can be determined in a way that does not depend on coordinate system or reference frame, i.e. a covariant way. But covariant also refers, unfortunately, to certain components of a vector or tensor that do usually change very much when the coordinates change. The simplest example is the vector from one point to another in ordinary three dimensional geometry. In the usual Euclidean metric, the numerical values of the contravariant and covariant versions of the vector are identical. If we perform a coordinate transformation doubling all the coordinates, (x',y',z') = (2x,2y,2z) then all the contravariant coordinates double but the covariant ones are cut in half. The distance, which depends only on the products of the coordinate differences (contravariant times covariant) (summed, and then the square root taken) does not change. It is covariant, but the covariant coordinate increments were all cut in half. The transformation is a covariant one, but does not preserve the covariant components. The invariance of the distance relates to the discussion of "covariant transformation" while the discussion of the changes in individual coordinate values, contravariant vs covariant, belongs in "contravariant". Thus, the notice suggesting merge should be removed. If you want to match "contravariant" with something, then you should create a page "covariant component" as opposed to "covariant transformation." Else you could rename "contravariant" as "Contravariant and covariant components" and I will port some of this discussion in there. These very concepts are rather pass� now, at least in relativity theory, as the use of differential forms is supplanting old fashioned tensor analysis, but some folks still use tensors for fluid and continuum mechanics [7] (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/C/Co/Continuum_mechanics.htm), rheology [8] (http://maps.unomaha.edu/Maher/GEOL3300/week6/rheology.html), mechanical vibration, crystal optics [9] (http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/c/cr/crystal_optics.htm) and other fields not so suitable for the fancier newer maths so the entries should not be dropped. Simple tensor analysis is helpful when a cause (force, mechanical stress, polarized optical beam, e.g.) produce an effect imperfectly aligned with it. Such usages do not lend themselves as much to exterior differential form analysis so there's no reason to toss old-fashioned tensor analysis. Pdn 13:48, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

From User:203.26.206.130

I hope that you enjoy re-defining vandalism to mean any act that aims to produce facts, whereas of course deleting things randomly is the work of an administrator, like yourself.

You are a moron. Congratulations. 203.26.206.130 18:51, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

FYI, a Request_for_arbitration has been opened on user Internodeuser -- Longhair | Talk 12:10, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Contravariant transformation???????

Dear Anome (sorry to put this as a trailer on some vandalism , but I do not know how to create new messages without appending to old.) I'm afraid that the two usages of "covariant" are so very different that your concept of parallel disambiguation pages won't fly. I have never heard of a "contravariant transformation", though you could ask a person more expert than I in differential geometry or differential forms. As I explained, "covariant components" and "contravariant components" are two faces, so to speak, of the same thing. The second one, in the case of the differentials of coordinates (hope I restricted my remark to that case) is an integrable quantity, a thing many people do not realise. Thus, if one totals the contravariant component of "dx" around some closed curve one gets the change in x, a property not generally shared with the covariant component of dx. I do not know how "covariant" came to be used for vector components, but I do not see it as related to the invariance under transformations. The devil of it is that we can't just change "covariant transformation" to "transformation with invariants" for many reasons, including wide usage probably started by Einstein. You could make up a disambiguation page for "covariant" pointing to "covariant transformation" on the one hand and "covariant tensor components" on the other. Unfortunately you cannot just use names like "covariant tensor" and/or "contravariant tensor" because these are two faces of one item. So you would have to work with "covariant tensor components" and make up a page like the existing one for "contravariant" for that case, so you could change "contravariant" to "contravariant tensor components." Actually, now that I think of it you could rename "contravariant" as "contravariant and covariant tensor components" and I'd be glad to fill in the "covariant" portion - you can leave a stub. Then the disambiguation page would fork between "covariant transformation" and "contravariant and covariant tensor components."

I think we probably need to discuss this at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics I agree with you about the covariant and contravariant components of tensors; tensors seem to be a particularly tricky subject here for some reason. The other terms really need some thought; you've certainly convinced me that a simple merge/redirect will not do the job. To that end, I'm copying your recent comments and this reply into the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics page. -- The Anome 14:51, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

Also I return to an item wherein I already posted a comment against a merger, [[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Celestial_mechanics)]. The two subjects for which merger is proposed are almost disjoint, with celestial mechanics being a highly mathematical subject within physics and astronomy, while "astrodynamics" applies to spacecraft engineering. Both astronomy and spacecraft engineering are specialties in which I have published. This merger panel is attracting idle comment and should go away. It shows up directly on the Celestial mechanics page and it is the ruddiest of red herrings. The existing page is rather trivial and does duplicate the other, so I am willing to rewrite the celestial mechanics one, when I have time, but only if the merger notice is removed in both places. I just found where I could delete a couple of lines on merger, but I am not sure if the merger idea would still appear other places. The Astrodynamics page is acceptable. Pdn 14:42, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Javascript

How does one create Javascript? → JarlaxleArtemis 00:39, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (provinces)

Maybe you can have a look at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (provinces). Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

inappropriate behavior

What what? inappropriate? there are 25 pages dedicated to what i did (Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense). And yet i'm supposed to be the flag bearer for responsible wiki behavior all of the time am i? well, EXCuuuuuuusse me for cutting loose for this one time. how bout banning the real no-gooders around here (like the jerkoff that put somesort of rambling threat on my user talk) once in a while? in conclusion: fooorrrget you! (>*_*)>...(^*_*^)...<(*_*<)...(v*_*v) -AfC 9:57, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure you're a nice guy, but the rules apply to everyone equally, all the time. Why not try Uncyclopedia? They're a comedy fun site, and they like that sort of thing there. -- The Anome 10:05, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Because despite my sleep deprivation induced acting out I beleive in the concept, then again I always did like communism as well and that didn't fare so good :\ . I actaully don't really care about being blocked. As you can see there are few limits to what people can do blocked or not. And I was blocked earlier because of the wide IP block someone tried to stop the vadalism that was occuring. And i'm going to bed anyway. I also don't care for BJAODN because i do think it does incourage vadalism beyond that which is naturally occuring, and have always wondered why something like it existed if Wikipedia trully does want to take itself seriously. --AfC 10:17, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

BJAODN exists for the entertainment of the anti-vandal patrollers, not the vandals. For someone who doesn't care about being blocked, you're certainly making a big fuss about it here; why don't you get some sleep, and come back tomorrow? And take my hint about Uncyclopedia; a good spoof is really appreciated there. -- The Anome 10:26, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

24/7 (BDSM)

I see you've added a link to 24/7 (BDSM) into the Total Power Exchange (BDSM) article. There used to be an article 24/7 (BDSM) earlier, but it was up for VfD, and deleted because of a consensus. If you are going to make another 24/7 (BDSM) article, then I think the contents should be more than just mentioning it means being in a BDSM position throughout the week. — JIP | Talk 11:02, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree, the old article was VfD-able. However, I think the concept is a valid encyclopedia topic which could bear a non-trivial article. Needless to say, I will happily remove the link if it becomes a magnet for similar unencyclopedic content. -- The Anome 11:05, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

A bot is needed

Hello. You probably don't know me, but I have been doing the bot-assisted transwikis to Wiktionary almost daily now for a while. (See the log on WP:TL). The bot was created by Kevin Rector, who seems to have left the project recently. Well, we need a similar bot, so I can do transwikis to all the other projects, especially Wikiource and Wikibooks, which have huge backlogs and some of those have been hanging around for months (see Category:Move to Wikisource, Category:Move to Wikibooks etc.). There's also a bug or two that could be worked out. Please contact me if you would be able to do this, and are interested in it. Thank you. (Also, if not, do you know anyone else who could?) --