User talk:The Anome/archive 8

Please add new comments to the bottom of this page.

Moved old talk to

Papa Lazarou

Please go ahead and edit this page. Papa Lazarou Posted by confusedmiked 20.06.05

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-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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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] 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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]). 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]). 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)

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)

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)

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)

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.

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

Math CotW

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)

Reverting Talk:Calendars of 2005

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)

Quotes

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

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.

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)

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)

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?

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)

astronomy

See [4] 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)

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)

New Mathematics Project Participants List

Hello The Anome.

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

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)

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)

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)

Lemmy and ELP

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

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]). 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]). 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)

Body Language Plagerism

JPII

Re: Melissa Fahn Biography

-Millebaci

Good day. -millebaci

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.

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

FIPS/Chile

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Glamour

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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)Reply

Thanks

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

identity wrong?

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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)Reply

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)

Removal of items from ITN

Regarding your removal of items from ITN: Perhaps you should do a cursory look at the page history or the news 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)

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)

Contravariant/Covariant

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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 passé 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], rheology [8], mechanical vibration, crystal optics [9] 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)Reply

From User:203.26.206.130

Latest comment: 20 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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)Reply

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

Contravariant transformation???????

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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]]. 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)Reply

Javascript

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

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (provinces)

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

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)

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)

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?) --Dmcdevit 23:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Unfortunately I don't have the time to do this at the moment; my previous bot is now somewhat out-of-date, and I don't have time to polish it up to the currently-required standards. I suggest posting to the wikipedia-l [11] and wikitech-l [12] mailing lists, where potential bot authors tend to hang out. -- The Anome 08:37, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, to be clear, I was assuming I would still be running the bot. I will do what you suggested, hadn't thought of that. Thanks for your time. --Dmcdevit 20:30, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

UK COTW: Welsh people

Hey, just to let you know that an article you voted for - Welsh people - has been chosen as the UK COTW. -- Cheers, Joolz 18:46, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Slurp slurp

I prefer wine or beer myself -- despite working in Japan, where people who are otherwise apparently sane like to compare blood types.

I think we need to take a much more sceptical tone here, and just report on the phenomenon of web sites etc. making these claims (the existence of which is not in doubt), and just remove the rather dodgy detailed and conflicting claims made on these websites unless there is third-party verifiable evidence of those claims.

Very well said. Be bold with this claptrap. Meanwhile, I'm going home. (And if I have any meat for dinner, it will be well done, I assure you.) -- Hoary 11:22, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)

sarcasm

sarcasm there is no need for. you deleted to much, so i pu it back, you added tags that have aleady been discussed in the archives, so i removed them... Gabrielsimon 19:23, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah. I hadn't realized I was in the presence of Authority. Oh, and I note that you still haven't added any cites to support the assertions you defend, although I have added several to back up the assertions I've added to the article. -- The Anome 19:25, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

i would tell you all about why i know things, if you want, IM me on aim gab the shaman is the ID. Gabrielsimon 19:35, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And a week later, certain contributions to the great debate on Vampire lifestyle are just as bizarre. Anome, if you have a few spare minutes, do please return, armed with Occam's razor and the other tools of a discriminating mind. -- Hoary 14:23, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Pakistan

Would you like to join the animated discussion on the Pakistan's talk page? The current issue is whether "Pakistan is famous for its support of Taliban and 9/11 terrorist" is a suitable sentence to start the article's first paragraph. Your contribution would be much appreciated, as the current discussion seems to be more of a dialog between Ragib and SamTr014 Talk:Pakistan. Thanks !--PrinceA 07:10, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Blowing a raspberry

Please remember to fix redirects (and preferably other links to the old title) when moving a page. Thanks, -- Infrogmation 17:24, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done. -- The Anome 23:54, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Howard Stern vandalism

I just wanted to stop by and say thanks for answering my request in my edit summary regarding User:24.62.59.74's vandalism. You (Talk) 23:53, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Just wanted to say, I know I didn't handle it perfectly. There was another, less active IP vandalising that page, and in at least one case, I reverted one's vandalism and restored the other's because it was happening so quickly. You (Talk) 23:55, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Duplicated talk page

It appears that a large chunk of your talk page has been duplicated. Josh Parris ✉ 01:33, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please have a look.

A relatively new contributor, Zen-master, has taken a negative interest in the article on Race_and_intelligence has has attacked one of the most highly responsible and objective contributors that I know of, Rikurzhen, essentially calling him a racist and a Naze. A few of us have tried to reason with him regarding the points of possible intellectual inquiry that he has brought up, but he refuses to respond in an objective way and instead fires off another ad hominem attack. I think Rikurzhen can handle the ego assault, but I would not like to see this kind of abuse directed against less resilient and less self-confident contributors. I put in a "request for comment", thought about it, and then deleted it as being perhaps too extreme. Could you please have a look at the article's discussion page? Perhaps as someone not part of ongoing discussions on article content you could set this individual on a better path. Thanks. P0M 02:38, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Another user has entered into a lengthy conversation with Zen-master on his talk page, but the result is the same. I see you had a look at the article itself and made a useful change. Z's main problem, as I see it, is that Z shuts off the discussion by ignoring valid criticisms of his position (and even people who have recently wandered in from the outside without reading much of the previous postings say the same thing). It's as though some doctor in the 1800s got interested in why more skin cancer was occurring in Denver, Colorado than in Boston, but something in his ideology forbade him from looking at the rate at which white people get skin cancer, the rate at which Amerinds get skin cancer, etc. You could look at education, nutrition, economic level, etc., and never get a clue.

FWIW P0M 00:44, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image:Map of Tennessee highlighting Sevier County.png

Hi. I noticed that the image Image:Map of Tennessee highlighting Sevier County.png doesn't exist. I saw that User:The Anomebot created some (all?) of the Category:Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 maps of Tennessee; let me know if I should contact someone else. Thanks. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 02:55, 2005 Jun 25 (UTC)

Moab

Need your help/opinion: I think that page Moab should become a disambiguation page and look something like this:

Moab (disambiguation)

Can mean:

*[[Moab (biblical)]] Son of Lot, grandnephew of Abraham
*[[Moab, Jordan]] or the Kingdom of Moab. Stretch of land between the River Arnon and the Brook of Zered on the coast of the Dead Sea, controled by Moab.
*[[Moab, Utah]] Town in Southeastern Utah
*[[Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb]] (also known as the Mother Of All Bombs; accronym: MOAB) The most powerful non-nuclear weapon ever designed. 


{{disambig}}
This is a disambiguation page — a navigational aid which lists other pages that might otherwise share the same title. If an article link referred you here, you might want to go back and fix it to point directly to the intended page.

What do you think? It would mean creating a new page for:

Moab (biblical) (taking part of the current Moab page.
Moab, Jordan (moving the existing page Moab to this one.

Let me know, WikiDon 28 June 2005 05:23 (UTC)

If I click "move" does it move all the thinks ("What links here"), or would I have to go to each page and change the link manually? There are a lot of them for Moab. WikiDon 28 June 2005 07:16 (UTC)

It automatically creates a redirect page. However, you will still have to fix double-redirects by hand. -- The Anome June 28, 2005 07:18 (UTC)

Pseudo-homosexuality dispute

Please add a section to Talk:Pseudo-homosexuality explaining what aspects of the factual accuracy of the article are in dispute. Thanks. -Seth Mahoney July 2, 2005 21:56 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (chemistry)

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (chemistry). I have now summarized the discussion on that page and added certain points which have been discussed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals. Any comments, and especially improvements, on the results would be more than welcome. Physchim62 7 July 2005 11:02 (UTC)

Bendix G-15

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

On Bendix G-15 you put up an external link to a photo supposed to be a Bendix G-15. It doesn't look like a picture of a compute to me. Is this an error? Bubba73 01:01, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Looks like a computer to me. In college, we had something like this which we used as a coffee table. Wish I still had it. linas 05:55, 13 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Institutional racism

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You asked a question about the "functional integration" of institutional racism a few weeks back, and I responded at length. Because you've entered no response, I thought I'd call your attention to it, in case you missed it. Peace. deeceevoice 06:13, 10 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hi

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I see you've been having fun discussing aetherometry. Just wanted to say "hi". linas 05:52, 13 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Aetherometry

Latest comment: 20 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I can understand that you were unhappy with the content of the article (I wasn't thrilled with it myself), but I was quite unhappy that you unprotected the article, seemingly simply so that you could rectify the problems you saw with it. Unprotecting and editing is, in my book, also something of an offense (although obviously not as bad as editing and protecting), because in both cases one is using one's admin powers to do something an ordinary editor could not do. Hopefully, next time a situation like this arises, you will ask someone else (preferable the admin who protected it, if they are online) to review the protection in cases where you wish to edit an article.

I found unprotecting after only a few hours to be particularly egregious because this article has been the source of problems for almost a month now (see here and here). If the edit war breaks out again, I will be re-protecting it again, and I will be most unhappy if you revert my decision and unprotect it again. Noel (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Noel, I am sad that you consider me to have committed what you consider to be an offense against your authority. (Although, of course, not one against Wikipedia rules.) I did two things: First, I unprotected the article, which had been blocked for over eleven hours to keep out a 3RR sockpuppet editor, to allow anyone to edit it, as is normal. Then, almost two and a half hours later, I went back to the article, wearing my normal user's hat and edited it, in what I considered to be an NPOV way, being fair to both sides, and in a way that followed the discussion in the talk page -- note, for example, that I replaced the list I removed with a cite to the original source of the removed text -- and left the article unprotected as before, still available for anyone else to edit. Now, if I had wanted to abuse my admin powers, I would have simply edited it whilst protected. Note that protecting pages to edit wars is only intended as a temporary measure, and is not intended to be used for long periods. Please calm down before you begin describing other people's actions as "egregious" or an "offense". May I suggest that the way forward with the IP sockpuppet is to deal with them by blocking their IP range, rather than indefinitely blocking pages, or taking issue with other admins? -- The Anome 23:33, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

11 hours is nothing when the edit war has been going on for nearly a month. We leave articles protected for weeks all the time, and there's no reason the article on this inconsequential topic couldn't have been left protected. Noel (talk) 00:49, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

province->Province

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I noticed that in your List of FIPS region codes, many many red links can be turned blue by capitalising the word Province. I noticed this while working on the Red Link Recovery WikiProject (Capitalisation). You can help by capitalising this word in your list. Wiggin15 05:39, 22 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

UKCOTW: Cornish people

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Just to let you know, an article you've voted for, has became this week's UKCOTW - Cornish people. Come and help out! Cheers -- Joolz 19:26, 24 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/3.14

Given your prior involvement in the discussion of a related article, you may wish to participate in this discussion. Uncle G 01:56:54, 2005-07-25 (UTC)

Source for NIN "Talking Heads" quote

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You removes a significant paragraph of info from the Nine Inch Nails article. This section was already discussed in the Discussion section, and a source was provided. Please be sure to check discussion pages before making such edits in the future. --Insomniak 16:04, 28 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for providing a cite. The sentence (not a paragraph) that was there before was obviously wrong: the font in the NIN logo bears no resemblence to that in the Talking Heads album. What is similar, as stated by Reznor himself, is the typography, specifically the use of flipped letters. I have corrected the text appropriately. -- The Anome 16:58, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi!

I wonder if this guild is anything that you may benefit from, and in that case, feel invited to sign in :)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conspiracy: The World Conspiracy Guild

Have a good day :)

--Striver 01:35, 30 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Leggings

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you, thank you, thank you. PKM 17:05, 30 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Nadia Russ: NeoPopRealism

I have relisted Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Nadia Russ: NeoPopRealism because of irregularities in the process. Please review your vote and indicate whether it stands or you wish to change it. -- Essjay · Talk 13:28, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Speedy Deletes

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You might already know abou the {{nn-bio}} template but I thought I would point it out. It gives the admin a better idea of exactly why a page should be deleted. (Vanity is not a cause for sd, only vfd, no claim of notariety is a reason for sd) Usrnme h8er 16:01, 9 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for letting me know. -- The Anome 16:03, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Copyright Images

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for the heads up. I was a very new user, less than a week, when I posted those images. Under the Coyright Policy it said, "if you obtain special permission to use a copyrighted work from the copyright holder under the terms of our license, you must make a note of that fact (along with names and dates)" so I assumed, since I did receive permission, it was permitted. I am now aware of the Boilerplate request for permission rather then a simple e-mail grainting permission. As for copyright notices, I am not removing them, I am removing the false statements added to them about me, and following the procedure, adding what is described in the notice, "To the poster: If there was permission to use this image...please indicate so here." I will continue to do this and if I am blocked for doing it then so be it. I have already raised the issue with administrators and will not stop till they tell me to. You no longer have to worry if I am aware about the possibility of me being blocked. Thank you. --Evmore 12:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Fenian Rising

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You created a disambiguation page at Fenian Rising, but the only the second rebellion involved the Fenians. I'd rather see the Fenian Rising (1867) article moved to that title.

Lapsed Pacifist 23:46, 12 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Kruskals Tree Theorem

My apologies for the abovementioned item. The site from which I copied the material stated: " CITE THIS AS:

Eric W. Weisstein. "Kruskal's Tree Theorem." From MathWorld--A Wolfram Web Resource. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/KruskalsTreeTheorem.html "

which I mistakenly took to mean that the information could be copied. I will write to the author of the site and request permission to use the content. Thanks for helping me on that one :/

Thanks on Cryptoporticus

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

That's gonna be a tough article. Do you know any other architecture and or Roman junkies that can help expand it? Karmafist 00:35, 22 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Deleting articles on VFD

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A reminder: As per Wikipedia:Deletion process, when you delete articles on VFD, always paste the link to the VFD discussion in the "Reason for deletion" box. It helps other admins like myself to have easy access to those discussions in the deletion log, especially when another user asks about the results, or challenges them on VFU. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:31, 22 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks

Thank you for blocking that IP address. I suspect it's the Feces page vandal I had a run-in with a few weeks ago when I protected the page against his trolling. It seems I've not been forgiven. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 10:27, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Joe Petagno

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I put together what I could find, if you have any comments, you know what to do. Alf ^melmac 10:34, 16 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for blocking

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey, thanks for blocking that spammer. Me and another editor were struggling to keep up with all his vandalism. I am really pleased because this is the first time I seen a vandal Ive been edit warring with blocked. So, while trying not to find joy in a block, thanks a million. Now at least I can go to bed;) Ban e s 19:28, 2 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Blocking IP numbers

Please be aware that when you block an IP address used by AOL, you effectively block all other users randomly assigned that number. This happens to me frequently. Please see my file: User:WBardwin/AOL Block Collection. I would appreciate a prompt release of the block. Informtion below. WBardwin

Your user name or IP address has been blocked by The Anome.

The reason given is this: Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "BUTTSPAMM". The reason given for BUTTSPAMM's block is: "offensive username, no edits so far".

You can email The Anome (no, I can't -- you haven't filed an e-mail address with Wiki.) or one of the other administrators to discuss the block. You may also edit your user talk page if you wish. If you believe that our blocking policy was violated, you may discuss the block publicly on the WikiEN-l mailing list. Note that you may not use the "email this user" feature unless you have a Wikipedia account and a valid email address registered in your user preferences.

Your IP address is 207.200.116.12.

Signoff

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. You are the first admin. I encountered, and I was favorably impressed.

After many hours with Wikipedia, I have decided that to edit science or philosophy articles is hopeless. Obviously, topics like "Objectivism" , "Creationism" the Great Flood, Parapsychology, and "General Semantics" will be dominated by devotees, who will, one way or the other, drown out sensible people and sensible viewpoints. Now it has gotten worse, especially in General Relativity. Some not very competent person "EMS" is promoting his own gravity theory and does not even understand geodesic deviation. His is a flat-space theory, in essence. M. Patel is a nice and reasonably capable chap, well-intentioned but among the various "players" they have let a person who has nothing useful to say Carl Hewitt, write more and more junk, and there are some more loose cannons in there. I have decided to void out as well as I could my user page but I would appreciate it if you could send my identity down the old "memory hole" - i.e. delete me as a user. I will not log in again. Pdn 19:34, 3 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Horchata

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for adding the "see also" to the Horchata page. I was unfamiliar with the other drink and I think linking the two together is a good thing. :) So thanks for helping me learn something new today. ManekiNeko | Talk 21:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

WP:CP

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. --nixie 00:07, 6 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Blatant copyright infringements may now be "speedied"

If an article and all its revisions are unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider and there is no assertion of permission, ownership or fair use and none seems likely, and the article is less than 48 hours old, it may be speedily deleted. See CSD A8 for full conditions.

After notifying the uploading editor by using wording similar to:

{{nothanks-sd|pg=page name|url=url of source}} -- ~~~~

Blank the page and replace the text with

{{db-copyvio|url=url of source}}

to the article in question, leaving the content visible. An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to speedily delete it or not.

Fantastic. This will help a lot. Thanks. -- The Anome 22:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

the wilderness society

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

cheers for moving that page, just wondering what the factuality dispute on The Wilderness Society page is for? what part of it is suspicious? it looks pretty right to me, though I haven't been involved in TWS myself. --naught101 10:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I was just highlighting the existence of the critical comment on its talk page. If you think the article's fine, note that on the talk page, and remove the notice in the article. Thanks! -- The Anome 10:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

sweet, done.--naught101 10:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Larry Jotter and the Really Bad Parody

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You tagged Larry Jotter and the Really Bad Parody for speedy deletion as "nonsense". The page is not patent nonsense in the sense needed to be a speedy delete candiate, IMO. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Jotter and the Really Bad Parody where the articel is now being discussed for deletion. DES ^(talk) 17:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Mathematical quote in internet article

Latest comment: 19 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Anome

I understand that your mathematical quote in the internet artcle is meant to baffle us mortals, but it has three " characters in it and really doesn't make any sense without at least having the word "that" in it somewhere. Could you tidy it up to give us a fighting chance, plaase?

-) --Nigelj 20:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Nigel, I've cleaned up the punctuation. It does actually make sense: in fact, it's actually a reasonably succinct and accurate description of what the Internet is: in plain-ish English, it means "the largest group of computers that can all both successfully send IP packets to, and receive IP packets from, every other computer in that group" (25 words). Seth Breidbart could have left out the "reflexive, transitive, symmetric closure" bit, since that's implied by "equivalence class", and simply said: "the largest equivalence class of the binary relation 'can be reached by an IP packet from'" (16 words), but it wouldn't have been nearly as funny. -- The Anome 09:33, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hmm. "the largest group of computers that can all receive IP packets from every other computer in that group" (18 words) seems to work, and is nearly as short as the math-phrased 16-word def. -- The Anome 09:47, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Trog say, "Woman good. Neanderthal Theory of Autism bad."

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think that this is actually the correct way to deal with this.
brenneman ^(t)^(c) 04:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Q1werty

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Q1werty was improperly blocked due to the fact that four administrators blocked this user infinitely four times. This is a minor notification that his block has been appropriately fixed. If it hasn't, then there's a bug in the MediaWiki system and should be reported. When I checked the logs on this person, I found that there were four infinite blocks on this user:

23:11, 10 October 2005 Rdsmith4 blocked "User:Q1werty" with an expiry time of indefinite (Vandal)
23:24, 10 October 2005 Redwolf24 blocked "User:Q1werty" with an expiry time of indefinite (Vandalisms!)
23:42, 10 October 2005 Katefan0 blocked "User:Q1werty" with an expiry time of indefinite (Page move vandal)
09:48, 11 October 2005 The Anome blocked "User:Q1werty" with an expiry time of indefinite (vandalism-only user)

One thing I noticed is that there was no notice on this particular user's talk page stating the user was infinitely blocked. Anyway, just letting you know what happened. Although, I don't see why he was blocked a fourth time... --AllyUnion (talk) 09:17, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Please vote on list of lists, a featured list candidate

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please vote at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of lists of mathematical topics. Michael Hardy 20:39, 13 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Dropping you a line

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Thanks very much for reporting me to WP:AN/I. I really appreciate how you assumed good faith. Captain Kreuk 18:00, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. -- The Anome 09:21, 17 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks

Hey, man, thanks for correcting my mistake vis-a-vis "Multiple Solutions." I like to help out the community, but the styling conventions scare me in the same way that MLA, APA, and Turabian do. By the way, you have one hell of a user:talk page.........

Hoover free flights promotion

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there,

could you please replace the copyright vio with the temp page?

Also note that Harry Cichy was put up on AFD today. You may want to vote... Mamawrit es ^{& listens} 21:40, 23 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

I was the nominator. -- The Anome 09:31, 24 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Anchorage

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"Anchorage" used to be a redirect that went to Anchorage, Alaska. I changed it to a dab page, and so I needed to fix anything that links to Anchorage (the city) to make it point to Anchorage, Alaska instead. That's why I came across your user subpage -- it links to Anchorage.

I can tell by the context that the "anchorage" you mean is the place to anchor a boat, so I thought I would do you the favor of changing the link to something like [[anchor|anchorage]], but then there weren't any other links like that, and besides, it never linked to the right anchorage anyway, so my dab change didn't make your page any more broken than it was before.

So I decided to put a long-winded explanation in your User talk page instead.—GraemeMcRae^talk 05:40, 27 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Happy Diwali

Tamaso ma jyotir gamaya ( Lead me from darkness to light.)
Wish you Happy Diwali
- P R A D E E P Somani (talk)
Feel free to send me e-mail.

Africa geostubs

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. I see youve been making and undating some african geostubs. I know becuase ive just changed the stubs on all of them! places in west africa (like gambia and sierra leone) get AfricaW-geo-stub and ones in east africa like tanzania get AfricaE-geo-stub. please could you use them next time? thanks BL kiss the lizard 02:52, 7 November 2005 (UTC) Reply

82.110.42.4

Latest comment: 19 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Chris Leppard was on the mailing list complaining about the quick block. Did you block him, then unblock him? Fred Bauder 14:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Fred, I can't see the message on any of the WP mailing lists I'm subscribed to, by searching for either his name or the IP address: could you give me a cite, such as a message-ID, or a link to a mailing list archive page containing the mail? Please see the editing history for this IP for the reasons I applied the block. -- The Anome 08:23, 13 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

You left a note on his page but did not actually block him 82.110.42.4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Fred Bauder 16:08, 13 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

I had an email exchange with him regarding using Wikipedia as an advertising vehicle. It seems his competitors were all listed so he thought it would be ok to make a link to his company also. It did seem that there were many links to companies on the page I looked at Penetration_test#Penetration_testing_companies. I suggested he take up the matter on the talk pages of the articles. I think a number of these folks have listed themselves. Fred Bauder 16:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Maybe they thought they were doing us a favour by "penetration testing" the site? Perhaps we should delete all of these other links, on the no-advertising principle? -- The Anome 15:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Mário de Andrade

Latest comment: 19 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Why did you revert my reversion to Mário de Andrade? The only change was a link to a redirect back to the article. Chick Bowen 13:30, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

It is now; see my edits to make it so. At the time you removed it, it was an open link to the title of an important poem, which seemed to me to be a valid link. I wondered if you had mistakenly reverted this whilst attempting to clean up the previous vandalism of the article. No criticism of you was, or is, intended by this action. -- The Anome 13:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough--and believe me, I didn't mean to be terse--I'm just trying to keep the article reasonably stable while it's on the main page. Now, though, I'm puzzled why Pauliceia Desvairada is in bold. Other book titles in the article are not. Thanks. Chick Bowen 13:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Because it's dealt with extensively in the article, and nowhere else, I thought it a vaild headword for this article. Feel free to split it out into its own article, which is probably the best long-term solution. -- The Anome 14:03, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

OK, I will do so. Makes sense, since Macunaíma has its own article (which could use some work too, while I'm at it). Thanks. Chick Bowen 14:19, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Nuggeting

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

NUGGET (AfD discussion)

You stated that this article was "unsourced" and a "neologism". Please re-visit both the article and the discussion. Please also visit Talk:NUGGET#Cleanup and consider adding the article to your watchlist and assisting in the effort to keep the article clear of unverifiable additions and original research by schoolchildren. Uncle G 15:17, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

In My Travels

Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

While travelling the US as, among other things,as a prospector, I've heard that the people who are either physically and/or mentally impaired are being experimented upon. I can't confirm this, nor deny this, and I know what this sounds like. One rumor I've heard is that mentally impaired boys experience docs injecting radioactive materials in their testicles. As stated, I know what this sounds like.Martial Law 01:32, 25 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

The reason behind these rumors is that those that are either physically and/or mentally impaired are incapable of consent, and these people have always been ill treated. In ancient times, they used to be killed, mainly for religious reasons, such as the human female has had sexual relations with The Devil and/or a demon, thus producing a impaired child, and due to this, the child must die, and some sects I've personally ran into still believe that people who are born physically and/or mentally impaired are the fruit of a human and a demon,The Devil having sexual relations. Now, they're being experimented upon, since society says they're valueless - at best. You travel the US as I've done, you'll see and hear some really strange and bizarre, yet true things and matters. Martial Law 01:45, 25 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

This is NOT about racisim,etc. at all, just about what I had seen,heard,experienced,no more,no less. Martial Law 02:03, 25 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what this has to do with my talk page. -- The Anome 14:55, 26 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Federal Standard 1037C clean up

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I thought you might be interested as I saw you have edited those articles back in 2002. Renata3 03:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Do not modify my comments

Latest comment: 19 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Please do not modify my comments ever again. If a vandal wishes to request to be unblocked, I have provided a link where I may be contacted. Hall Monitor 17:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Ouch. Please note that I was simply refactoring your boilerplate warning to a vandal to remove internal self-contradictions due to the inappropriateness of the template for indefinite blocks. I was attempting to help you out as a fellow admin in warning off a vandal, rather than attempting to subvert you. I note that after reverting my edits, you made effectively the same changes that I had, plus or minus a few words. Please don't bite your fellow admins. -- The Anome 17:49, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

I understand that you were acting in good faith, but would greatly appreciate it if you would contact me before modifying my comments. Please accept my apologies if my request came across too terse; at no time did I feel as if you were attempting to subvert me. ;-) Hall Monitor 17:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Would you prefer it if I had re-signed the modified notice as my own? Re-factoring comments in good faith has been (was?) long accepted as a perfectly reasonable Wiki-thing to do, providing that you don't change the meaning of the text, which I believe was the case here. I have been correcting typos in other people's comments, without changing the meaning, for a very long time -- it seems to me to be only polite to do so. -- The Anome 18:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

What I would prefer is that you contact me before changing comments which have my signature attached to them, even if you believe the change to be insignificant or helpful. I understand that you were acting in good faith, but I am not aware of any consensus which supports the modification of comments made by other people. Is there any sort of guideline you can refer to which documents this? Hall Monitor 19:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

No e-mail address

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

At the moment, there is no email address associated with your Wikipedia account. [13] Would you mind adding one? Hall Monitor 19:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Optimization glossary

Latest comment: 19 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The Anome, I don't think using speedy delete is the right way of merging articles. Please restore the article optimization glossary and make it a redirect instead. You can reply here if you have any comments. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

On reflection, you're right. Created a redirect to optimization (mathematics). -- The Anome 23:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. My request was kind of terse, I hope you did not get mad. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

No, I wasn't offended. Regards, The Anome 08:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about that...

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Sorry for that removal from the Fuck article. You learn the craziest things about your acronyms sometimes, I tell you....Tommstein 10:20, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thanks

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for your comment on User talk:OceanSplash. As you might see, he started a campaing against Muslim editors with Jimbo, but when you confronted him, he made a rethorical trick, and claimed he had a problem with Islam. Very objecionable in my view. --Striver 17:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Kamisese Mara and Britannica

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you for your note. I'll be popping in to the library tomorrow to photocopy the article in question. I'll then write a report, to be published on Wikinews. I will endeavour to show the similarities of the two articles, as well as the time-stamps from Wikipedia showing that OUR article predated THEIRS (which has only just been published, in their latest yearbook). David Cannon 10:28, 18 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Userpage

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Anome, are you sure this message should remain on your userpage? JFW | T@lk 23:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Kamisese Mara and Britannica

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've got a copy now of the article, and I think I need to apologise for leaping to conclusions too quickly. I still think the beginning of the Britannica article bears a striking resemblance to the first paragraph Wikipedia article, but the exact wording, and the order, is sufficiently different so a charge of plagiarism cannot be proved. I still suspect that Wikipedia may have "inspired" their article, but I would no longer call it plagiarism. I think most likely they've used Wikipedia as a resource, in much the same way that most of us would use Britannica as a resource. That said, I would like them to say so - especially in view of their negative public comments about Wikipedia. Nevertheless, I take back my charge of plagiarism. I should not have been so hasty to put such a charge in such a noticeable ___location, and I promise to be more careful in future. David Cannon 05:17, 19 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

DOM Reverts

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey thanks for catching the DOM reverts. I was kind of busy this weekend and didn't check in online too much. If you catch them doing it again can you leave a message on my talk page making me aware of it. Everytime this happens, I'm gong to add diffs to the arbitration case.

I've asked for an injunction or page protection. Hopefully one or the other will happen. Thanks again! Davidpdx 05:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

you rock

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

thanks for breaking off latex clothing into its own article. thankyou thankyou thankyou. I no longer have to war with sockpuppets! Themindset 18:59, 25 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Requested Geographical Regions

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

They exist (mostly because of redirects). --DMG413 16:50, 26 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for letting me know! -- The Anome 02:01, 27 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Anyone wanna clue me in?

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Reverts, deletions, getting bitched at on my talk page, etc. I dont know why Im even bothering to edit! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Star Trek Rules! (talk • contribs)

You know very well why; you like the attention. One more, and you get blocked from editing as a persistent vandal. -- The Anome 03:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Talk page vandalism

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for catching it! | Klaw ¡digame! 04:11, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Doosan vandal

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I was going through and tagging all of the stuff db-copyvio, but blocking him is pretty effective. Thanks!!! RasputinAXP _talk _contribs 04:36, 28 December 2005 (UTC)Reply