User talk:Dondervogel 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, Dondervogel 2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Hey there Tommy2010 18:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. If you'd like help, feel free to send a message --Tommy2010 18:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Information icon Hello, I'm 87.220.219.189. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! — Preceding undated comment added 13:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Dondervogel 2. You have new messages at Tommy2010's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

two things[edit]

Thanks for tidying this up. Only so you know, there would have been nothing untowards about leaving in the bit about how you came up with the new user name.

You are welcome to write a few straightforward paragraphs about powers of 1024 prefixes on your user page. Your outlook on this topic has not been the worry but rather, how you've tried to wedge your outlook into how the prefixes are handled on en.WP. The time may come to use them here. When it does, it'll likely happen fairly quickly and easily. Gwen Gale (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Reference articles[edit]

Thank you for your offer to help, which I gladly accept. Could you provide references to the papers by Horton and more recent publications you have in mind that can be used as references for criticism of the sloppy conventions around the decibel? You can put them on User talk:Boute/Decibel draft or on Talk:Decibel to keep decibel-related material together. Boute (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I tried to find the original 1924 and 1929 papers by Martin by Googling BSTJ and discovered the complete BSTJ collection on the Alcatel-Lucent BSTJ site. A real treasure trove! Boute (talk) 14:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Revision history of Timeline of binary prefixes[edit]

Could you be a bit more specific about what statements you want references for? I.e that certain machines were decimal vs binary? What I added summarizes a lot of the info in the timeline itself and is referenced there.--agr (talk) 18:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Mostly what I meant was a reference for which computers use decimal storage and which ones binary; the reason for placing the tag at the end of the paragraph was to also include stated usage of '8K' and '65K'. If these are all covered by existing cites later in the article, then feel free to remove the tag. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 10:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Rational for Binary Prefixes[edit]

How about adding something like the following to the T2 list of why not to deprecate:

The computer itself does not account for the number of bytes using binary prefixes, but someone in the 1980s decided to report memory, file and HDD size in this manner. As such, the use of Binary Prefixes is only a convention. Altering this convention to agree with SI Prefixes could have been done at any time as Apple did in 2009; however, for some reason it just stuck this way for much of the computer industry.

Tom94022 (talk) 00:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

You know more about the history than I do, so feel free to add this to the list if you feel it's important. I think the case against deprecation is overwhelming, but what the heck. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 09:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Fish, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hearing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gurdon Institute[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Gurdon Institute has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 11:32, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles Darwin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Darwin College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:00, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Decibel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:42, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 100 Gigabit Ethernet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 40G (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

IEC 80000-6[edit]

Hello, Dondervogel 2, and thank you for your contributions!

Some text in an article you worked on IEC 80000-6, appears to be directly copied from http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=31891. Please take a minute to double-check that you're following proper citing, quoting and close paraphrasing guidelines. The Help desk is always a good place to ask if you're not sure.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on IEC 80000-6 at any time. MadmanBot (talk) 17:55, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

IEC 80000-13 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Octet, Kibi, Yobi, Hartley, Shannon and Erlang
ISO 80000-3 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bel

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timeline of binary prefixes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kibi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timeline of binary prefixes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yobi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Knot (unit)[edit]

Please see Talk:Knot_(unit)#ISO_status. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to mecontribs) 16:06, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I have replied there. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

General principles in WP:MOSNUM[edit]

Hi Dondervogel2

Here are some quotes that may be of interest to you:

The first two paragraphs of WP:MOSNUM:

This part of the Manual of Style helps editors to achieve consistency in the use and formatting of numbers, dates, times, measurements, currencies, and coordinates in Wikipedia articles. Consistency in style and formatting promotes clarity and cohesion; this is especially important within an article. The goal is to make the whole encyclopedia easier and more intuitive to use. Try to write so the text cannot be misunderstood, and take account of what is likely to be familiar to readers—the less they have to look up definitions, the easier it is to be understood. Where this manual provides options, consistency should be maintained within an article unless there is a good reason to do otherwise. In direct quotations, the original text should be preserved. The Arbitration Committee has ruled that editors should not change an article from one guideline-defined style to another without a substantial reason unrelated to mere choice of style, and that revert-warring over optional styles is unacceptable.[1] If discussion cannot determine which style to use in an article, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.

Here is the opening paragraph of Unit Conversions:

Where English-speaking countries use different units for the same quantity, follow the "primary" quantity with a conversion in parentheses. This enables more readers to understand the quantity. Examples: the Mississippi River is 2,320 miles (3,734 km) long; the Murray River is 2,375 kilometres (1,476 mi) long.

Other principles are scattered through the text such as advice on conversion errors.

I hope that helps:

Best wishes, Michael Glass (talk) 12:58, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the troubling of quoting this text from mosnum. What I meant was something more specific about units. I am suggesting it would be useful to precede the section entitled "Units" with some guiding principles about the choice of units, transcending the disccussion of "which units system?. For example
  • Units are familiar and unambiguous
  • If an article begins in one unit (eg yard) it does not switch to another (eg metre) half-way through
  • If a unit is defined as one quantity (eg decade meaning ten years) it does not switch to another meaninf (eg decade meaning factor 10 in frequency) half-way through
Dondervogel 2 (talk) 13:58, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
I think that's a good idea in principle. However, I think we also need to look at the general structure of the whole section on which unit to use. I would need to flesh it out myself, but I think we need to begin with general principles and then work towards specific examples. At the moment the section tends to chop and change, and this causes duplications, and some confusion. An example of duplication is the advice to use miles on roads in the section on UK engineering articles, which largely duplicates the advice on using miles in the general section on UK articles, though arguably with a different, stricter, emphasis.
The structure, with its emphasis on the exceptions rather than the general rule, means that UK engineering articles have their own subheading while 'all other articles' which includes a far larger array of articles, is simply a dot point.
In short, I think there's a lot of work to be done to make the structure of the section more logical and consistent. However, I think that there is a heading waiting for your proposed addition: Which unit to use. Michael Glass (talk) 10:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Typhoon Talim (2005), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages LOW and MSW (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Citation format[edit]

I noticed you removed a citation without explanation and inserted a bare URL in Kilobyte. Since you didn't explain this in the edit summary or on the talk page, I have reverted your edits because they don't seem to be an improvement. Please see WP:CITE for citation guidelines, and please, always provide an WP:EDITSUMMARY so other editors can understand what you are doing and why. Thanks. —EncMstr (talk) 17:27, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I was not aware of removing a citation. Which one did I remove? Dondervogel 2 (talk) 20:58, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Hmmmm, I don't see the removal I thought I saw earlier. Perhaps it was because I just woke up then and was undoing a lot of vandalism before that. However, this edit you made inserts a bare URL and I reverted that along with your previous edit explaining my revert of both as Unexplained removal of citations and insertion of non-preferred format.
I guess never mind the removal. Sorry. —EncMstr (talk) 00:43, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lockheed CP-140 Aurora, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SHP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ISO 80000-3, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Arc and Gon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve ANSI S1.1-1994[edit]

Hi, I'm Ironholds. Dondervogel 2, thanks for creating ANSI S1.1-1994!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add references to articles you create.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Ironholds (talk) 04:52, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mebibyte, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ubuntu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Embraer Legacy 600, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wireless Gigabit Alliance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EVM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Kilowatt-hour[edit]

I'm contacting everyone who has commented but who hasn't taken an explicit Support or Oppose position (or if you did, I missed it). In the interest of bringing this discussion to resolution, it might be helpful if you could do that. Thanks. EEng (talk) 12:58, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

My initial position was to oppose because I thought it would contradict the International System of Quantities (ISQ). My position now is neutral. Rather than this very explicit rule for the kWh, why not replace it with the ISQ rule, with this as an example? That is something I would support. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 13:43, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
I would support that too, though I think it would need to say something like "Where such usage is seen in sources treating the topic area of the article, and where there is no risk of ambiguity, spaces between multiplied units may be omitted." However, I think that would take a much wider discussion, especially since there isn't any issue right now for anything other than kWh, so it would seem like a rule to solve a problem which isn't yet a problem; we're having the kWh discussion because kWh, specifically, has become an issue. EEng (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Just because the problem hasn't been mentioned doesn't mean it's not there. Examples are nm vs Nm (or N m) for torque, ah vs Ah for electric charge, and ns vs Ns (or N s) for impulse, but there must be others. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 15:40, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Level (logarithmic quantity), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bel. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited RapidIO, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gig. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

DECserver
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
DMX512
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
Digital AMPS
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
ELM327
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
High-bit-rate digital subscriber line
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
MIDI
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
MIDI usage and applications
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
On-board diagnostics
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
Optomux
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
SDS Protocol
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
SafetyBUS p
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
U interface
added a link pointing to Kilobaud
Yamaha MU-series
added a link pointing to Kilobaud

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Harmonisation[edit]

Really, you do not need to pursue this with me. Your comments have implied that unless WP settles on a single unit symbol to use, then the articles will not be in harmony, with each other, or with supposed standards. And that indeed is what the discussions have been about. To me, you seem a little put out that I am challenging that assumption and your use of the word "harmonization" to describe it (since the word itself implies more). I am perfectly able to see what the thrust of the discussion is about, but I am also perfectly able to see the way words can be taken to multiple things at one time. I don't really have a way to see your intent, but your words are capable of multiple interpretation, and I'll feel free to deal with that in the way I think most appropriate. And most appropriately of all, I will continue to assume your good faith, which I have not doubted even when I take issue with your words. Please be aware that I am not attempting to be testy with you. I just have a different point of view. I hope that is not an issue in itself. You have seemed (to me) to be disappointed in the reception you have already received, in a greater measure than I think is called for. I don't think it's that others don't understand what you're saying either. It's clear enough to get through. May you be a peace with whatever outcome is there; I assure you that I will be. Evensteven (talk) 15:56, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Dondervogel 2, I agree with everything that Evensteven said, and I have similar feelings. However, I would have appreciated a note in the active discussions when you actually brought the issue to WT:MOSNUM to let involved editors know. Though bringing this to MOSNUM was certainly a sensible thing to do, actually bringing it up there after indicating that you were done with the discussion at Talk:Astronomical unit makes it seem like WP:FORUMSHOP, especially since you've now brought this up in at least four places. And though I agree with your characterization that your view is in the minority, I don't believe there were any editors involved in the discussion who "prefer not to discuss" it. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 16:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I am puzzled by both of the above posts.
  • There is a clear majority against the adoption of a single harmonised unit symbol for astronomical unit. I do not understand the reason for this reluctance, but I accept it. End of story.
  • As for forum shopping, the discussion started at Talk:Voyager 1 and was moved to Talk:Astronomical unit on advice of editors there, and that is where it stayed. Some editors (two I believe) expressed an unwillingness to continue the discussion at Talk:Astronomical unit. That is their prerogative.
Dondervogel 2 (talk) 21:06, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I didn't notice that the word "here" was a link at WT:MOSNUM (my browser uses purple for visited links, very similar to the black of ordinary text), so I thought you were asking to continue discussion there. My mistake; I apologize. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 21:13, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I see. Now I understand the confusion. Apology accepted - I will be more carefully with my choice of words next time. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 21:30, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sport Hornet LRS, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LSA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 27 January 2015 (UTC)