User talk:Lomn

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

Old talk topics headquartered at User talk:Lomn/Archive

Jump starting[edit]

The question has been archived, but I added a note about why connecting to the "dead" car's chassis is best. -- ToE 19:37, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Right, wires as theoretically perfect conductors vs. being real wires. Thanks for the note! — Lomn 19:49, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you so much for answering to my questions on the ref desk. You're awesome. I could give you an award, a barnstar for that I would but I don't know where are they. Thank you. Kotjap (talk) 22:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Unlike charges[edit]

Why do unlike charges attract each other? I have asked this question to you because I know that you know the answer of this question. C. Walker19 (talk) 12:08, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

In fact, I don't know. My general response to this sort of question, when asked, is that "why" is often the wrong question unless you're doing professional academic work at the cutting edge of the field. Otherwise, I find "because that explanation is consistent with our observations" is as good an answer to "why" as any other. Of course, that can answer most any "why does science say this thing?", and so it's rather obviously not a useful answer apart from reinforcing that good theories are built on empirical evidence. — Lomn 16:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Horst Wessel[edit]

As the next two responses were equally useless, I must assume you intend to remove them also? Or are you playing favorites. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:00, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The only other comment when I performed the removal noted Wessel's Nazi membership. It wasn't much good, as it didn't seem to do much except restate the question, but it was on-topic. I have no desire to open the can of worms that is removing topical-but-bad responses, nor am I sure that it would have met that threshold in any case. As I have no knowledge about the actual question, I haven't returned to it. — Lomn 19:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Given that, I intend to restore any users' comments you deleted. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Given what? Come on, Bugs, at least step up and say outright why specific worthless commentary needs to be restored. — Lomn 20:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Given that you are deciding which comments to delete based on who made them, rather than on their "quality". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
That's exactly the opposite of what I wrote. — Lomn 20:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Your actions belie your words. You targeted specific non-answers and left others alone. There are only two fair options: restore all your deleted comments and box them up as off-topic; or delete all remaingin comments that don't answer the question. Which'll it be? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I would love nothing more than to see you make mockery of my actions by adding valuable answers that address the question asked. — Lomn 22:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Alternately, I'll ask again: why does this particular comment, which served no purpose and added no value, need to be restored? This is really the hill you want to claim martyrdom on? Content, not contributor. That's what I judged, and it's what I'd like to see you defend. — Lomn 22:33, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Open your eyes: The OP is a troll. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:02, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Entirely possible, as I noted to Medeis, and probably a good conversation for RD talk. I fail to see how that's relevant to your post, however. — Lomn 23:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)