User talk:Ray Eston Smith Jr

Welcome to Wikipedia[edit]

Hello, Ray Eston Smith Jr, 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've looked at your contributions so far, and it is clear you have an interest and understanding of Hamlet, Shakespeare's work, and puns therein. However, as Wikipedia is a tertiary source, we require assertions made within articles to be backed by secondary sources, such as scholarly books about Shakespeare, articles about Shakespeare, or such. I sugest you take a look at a few of the above articles to become more familiar with the processes and styles of Wikipedia, and then perhaps write a sourced article about the puns in Hamlet or in Shakespeare's work. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. —siro χ o 16:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Lambert AfD[edit]

On the AfD discussion you responded to me by stating "My understanding was that this was the way to propose the deletion of a group of related articles". I had wondered whether that was your intention, but your understanding was wrong. One can propose a group of articles for deletion, but you have to clearly list the articles at the top of the AfD and place the AfD template on all the articles and make sure it points to the same AfD discussion. You did not do that, so we were not discussing any article other than the one on Lambert. In any event, it would have been inappropriate to discuss the deletion of two topic articles, Entropy (energy dispersal) and Introduction to entropy alongside a biography. I am sure that the AfD discussion would have split the discussion. I hope you will not propose either of these articles for deletion. First you are wrong in the point that Frank Lambert had a big role in either of them. The latter, Introduction to entropy, has nothing to do with Lambert's ideas, although they are mentioned. It arose, like a lot of "Introduction to .." articles, because the main article was getting too complex. In this case the main entropy article is dominated by the physics perspective and is of little help to those in other disciplines who need to know something of entropy. It has been worked on by several experienced editors who have worked on other science articles. Entropy (energy dispersal) was written by editors who thought Lambert's ideas were important, but it could be expanded to cover earlier ideas. It just needs improving. AfD is not the way to improve articles. Why do you not have a go at improving it? I will try to have a go, but I am very busy. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Entropy[edit]

Hello,

I recently reverted your edits to Entropy. It is unusual to place a lengthy comment on the contents of the page in the page itself. This would be best raised at Talk:Entropy. User A1 (talk) 20:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

Hi Ray, sorry for this. I was out for a week and seem to have missed this. Being out for two more weeks as from tomorrow :-) Cheers - DVdm (talk) 12:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]