User talk:Tango: Difference between revisions
| Line 3,972: | Line 3,972: | ||
:You're welcome! --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango#top|talk]]) 16:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC) |
:You're welcome! --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango#top|talk]]) 16:54, 27 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
==Heavily== |
|||
I'd like to try Huggle, if possible, and to do that i need the rollback flag. [[User:Texcarson|Texcarson]] ([[User talk:Texcarson|talk]]) 00:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 00:53, 1 July 2009
Your puerile threats
Tango, don't be wet. Block my ip address and I'll get another. Block my ID and I'll get another. You would be much better off using reasoned, logical argument. Or are you too powerful/stupid for that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.132.159.170 (talk) 15:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
I believe this is a shared IP address, in use by AstraZeneca.
--A different 193.132.159.170 (talk) 13:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
In that case, why not block it? Don't just hide up there in Durham Uni, using their computers to issue threats.Address129.234.8.61 (talk) 21:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Thomas, I don't expect you to be any more impressed than I was at your attempt at sockpuppetry. When all is said and done, you have threatened to block me for putting a POV in an article, so block me and stop acting like a little Adolph.Address129.234.8.61 (talk) 10:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sockpuppetry? Did I forget to log in at some point? If so, that was an innocent mistake, not an attempt at sockpuppetry. You haven't vandalised the article since I gave you your final warning, so why would I block you? --Tango (talk) 12:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 32 | 6 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 33 | 13 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 21:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 34 | 20 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
comment request
Hi there, would you be so kind as to provide an indepenant neutral opinion of the image Construccionkaiserrick.jpg at the section of the same name on the talk page of Richmond Medical Center here please? Thank you very much as this may help to alleviate a current debate over its inclusion.CholgatalK! 01:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Tango. Since you were the acting admin in the recent blocking of the above user for edit warring, I guessed I should inform you that, after being unblocked, he has not changed his editing habits nor started talking to users on article talk pages. I don't know how best to handle this, because any reversion of his edits with an explanation to take it to the talk page is basically ignored, I figured it might just be best to let an admin know. Please let me know if there's a way to possibly better handle this next time- I've been around for a while but I'm still not really experienced with Wikipedia processes. :) --ForbiddenWord 16:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look. --Tango 16:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
1request for comment
would you mind commenting here please? [1]CholgatalK! 02:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Laveol, Mr. Neutron, ShippingIndustry
OK. I guess 2 of those person have been Laveol, Mr. Neutron or ShippingIndustry. I guess they're same person using proxies or something. All of them just use to vandalize and edit the same pages 7/24. It's obviously they're paid to do that by some propagandist organizations. They also accuse me without proofs and vandalize my pages all the time. I guess it's a part of their strategy to stop me to write on Wikipedia. Can you check out those users' IP's and their edits, please? Thanks, --Amacos 04:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- I can't take a look at their edits, but that's as much as I can do. You need checkuser privileges to find out users' IP addresses. I'll look at the edits, and if it looks worth a checkuser, I'll make the request. --Tango 13:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- ShippingIndustry looks like a sockpuppet, but the account hasn't been used in over a month, so I don't think there's any reason to do anything about it. If it starts editing again, we can act then. The other two don't look like obvious sockpuppets to me. If you want, you can go to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets and give detailed evidence (edits they've made that suggest they are the same person, for example). If you think they are being paid to edit, you could try the conflict of interest noticeboard, but I doubt you'll get anywhere with that, it's pretty much impossible to prove. --Tango 13:28, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 36 | 3 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 05:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 37 | 10 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 21:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Birmingham meetup
Hi there, I noticed you put your name down as interested in a Birmingham meetup. Just letting you know, the date is now set as Saturday 20th October. We really need input on where, and what time we will meet, so comments would be much appreciated on the page. Thanks. Majorly (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Possible sockpuppetry by currently blocked editor
Hello. I wanted to apprise of possible chicanery. You previously blocked this editor for one month for edit warring at Subregion; after that editor posted notice to you through IP User:189.154.52.229 in circumvention of your block, the blocking period was doubled. Well, this editor may be at it again: please observe recent point-of-view edits at this template by IP User:189.154.77.175: both IPs are from the same vicinity (Monterrey, Mexico) -- as is the blocked editor, per that editor's user page -- with similar addresses, and the convergence of these three editors/edits is most likely not coincidence.
You may choose to deal with this further, and would encourage corrective actions. Anyhow, thanks for your attention to this. 216.234.60.106 01:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- The IP address added "North America" to a list of Mexico related pages and then removed it again. How is that POV? --Tango 12:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- It may or may not be POV. That is not the issue: what may be is that the addition and removal of information by that IP, in combination with the positioning of the blocked editor above regarding that template and collegial editing with User:Supaman89, may lead one to believe that they are one and the same person. Even the detail for each IP on WHOIS is similar (e.g., both belonging to LACNIC). Anyhow, do with it what you will. 216.234.60.106 22:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- They almost certainly use the same ISP. More than that, we have no way to tell. The only two edits the IP address has made are to an article about its home country, so we can't really say they are the same person because they have the same interests. If you see any disruptive edits from that IP range, please let me know, but as long as the edits stay acceptable, I think we have to give the benefit of the doubt. Thanks for keeping me informed, though. --Tango 10:53, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your attention to this. I will notify you of any anomalies I come across. 216.234.60.106 12:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
As if someone was reading my mind: this report is pertinent to the above. Perhaps additional action is warranted? In the very least, I will list the IP above in the sockpuppetry report. 216.234.60.106 00:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Tango, it's me Supaman89, I've just been informed that someone... has asked for a usercheck on my account arguing that AlexCovarrubias and I might be the same person, so I just wanted to let you know that I strongly support the checking so we can clarify all this issue, Alex and I would like a public checkuser and if necessary I give permission to do it, regards. Supaman89 19:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- The checkuser that did the original check is aware of your request. It's entirely up to him, but he doesn't seem keen on doing anything. He doesn't think there's anything he can say that would really clarify the matter. He sticks with his original assessment that you are "possibly" the same person, but it's not likely. --Tango 20:03, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
RE: G-Virus Composition image
"Hey man, got a question for ya, where'd that G-Virus Composition image come from? That's not in any cutscene I've seen in RE2...
Thanks Tango"
Do you mean the one from this page? I'm pretty sure it's in Resi2, man. Either that or its an exclusive in Weskers Report 1. Here's a link: Weskers Reports. It's number three that the picture is from. Hope it helps. --Garfunkle20 17:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Must be a different Tango - I have no idea what you're talking about. Sorry. --Tango 18:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Strange... Well, sorry about the mishap :p --Garfunkle20 21:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
AlexCovarrubias
I've unblocked Alex, because he agreed via email to voluntarily limit himself to one revert per day per page for the foreseeable future. I have no objection to your reblocking him if he violates this. I think that he didn't understand that posting here via IP would be considered block violation, although he is now of course aware that he should have posted on his own talk page. Picaroon (t) 23:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Personally, I would have waited until the original 1 month block was up, but after that, I was planning on unblocking him early myself. An extra month was overkill, really - I must have been having a bad day. --Tango 00:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
RE:
I've decided to get Independance day to GA-class. A list of improvements is here, and one of them is to remove that whole paragraph as it does not drive the plot. Eariler some IPer reverted my entire revision to the plot, and a while ago my revisions where always reverted pertainging to the trivia. Its ovbious that noo one bothered to look at the assessment, therefore any revert to an eariler revision, I assume bad faith; I would say these reverts where going on within a periods of weeks. I'm annoyed at these revisions when they're just screaming "NO! dont change! its better this way!" when theyre not thinking about it from a Wikipedians POV. THROUGH FIRE JUSTICE IS SERVED! 01:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Plus, now take a took at his edits on Thomas J. Whitmore, and the film. This person ovbiously does not want to comply. THROUGH FIRE JUSTICE IS SERVED! 12:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 03, 2007
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 40 | 1 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 45 | 5 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 46 | 12 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 47 | 19 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Is that you on groklaw?
Conversation seems overheated. For what it's worth, your advice is more likely to be effective than a call to arms. Sorry that you have to be the one to apparently destroy people's faith in Wikipedia. Cool Hand Luke 20:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it's me. PJ is, understandably, taking it all rather personally - probably because it is quite personal. I'm on my way to look at the article properly and see if there's anything I can do without having the research all the disputes in full... --Tango (talk) 20:50, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:The Core Contest
Could you tweak the banner you put on the project page - I was not aware that the endorsement of the Wikipedia community was an issue. --Sagaciousuk (talk) 22:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think the fact that a large number of people have objected to the project shows that it is very much an issue. --Tango (talk) 22:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- To be honest, there aren't a large number of people objecting. It's the same few people, over and over and over... --Sagaciousuk (talk) 22:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
[2] This edit restores a contentious piece of information you've now added twice to a fully protected page. That is textbook wheel warring, and I strongly advise you to revert yourself. WilyD 22:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- It's not contentious, it's simple fact. It's inclusion may be contentious, but the information certainly isn't. Would you prefer it if I just removed the inappropriate protection and then made the edit? --Tango (talk) 23:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Unprotecting a page that's locked because of a dispute to edit it is also highly inappropriate conduct. Only uninvolved admins should unlock or edit pages, and only when a consensus is reached. WilyD 23:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was never involved in the dispute that resulted in it being protected, so as far as undoing the protection is concerned, I am an uninvolved admin. Also, we don't require a consensus to be reached before unprotecting pages, we just require things to have calmed down. --Tango (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- You're now an involved admin, by any reasonable understanding of the term. Any reasonable understanding of "calmed down" could also not apply to the page in question. WilyD 23:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- The dispute over the banner has nothing to do with the dispute that resulted in the protection. The protection doesn't even work against the banner dispute, as has been demonstrated. The dispute that resulted in the protection has, to know knowledge, calmed down - to the extend that it was ever heated enough to require protection in the first place. --Tango (talk) 23:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Of course, this is just advice, you're free to disregard it. Of course, that people are using the page as an attack forum against a bunch of editors is likely to result in in moving up the dispute resolution tree, and I wouldn't want to be seen to have wheel warred there. Your mileage, as usual, may vary. WilyD 14:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- The dispute over the banner has nothing to do with the dispute that resulted in the protection. The protection doesn't even work against the banner dispute, as has been demonstrated. The dispute that resulted in the protection has, to know knowledge, calmed down - to the extend that it was ever heated enough to require protection in the first place. --Tango (talk) 23:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- You're now an involved admin, by any reasonable understanding of the term. Any reasonable understanding of "calmed down" could also not apply to the page in question. WilyD 23:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was never involved in the dispute that resulted in it being protected, so as far as undoing the protection is concerned, I am an uninvolved admin. Also, we don't require a consensus to be reached before unprotecting pages, we just require things to have calmed down. --Tango (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Unprotecting a page that's locked because of a dispute to edit it is also highly inappropriate conduct. Only uninvolved admins should unlock or edit pages, and only when a consensus is reached. WilyD 23:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 49 | 3 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
That number ...
Just to warn you, arguing with these people tends to have only one benefit, and that's discovering brand new ways to prove the equality. If this guy is anything like the ones from the talk page archives (and if I'm right, he is one of them, and I know which one I suspect), he's going to make the same old arguments, the same old mistakes, and have the same old inability to agree with any of our conclusions, even if they come from assumptions he is perfectly willing to accept. On the other hand, arguing with these people may cause hypertension, nausea, frustration, bile, and the desire to take a sledgehammer to their head, so don't lose your cool. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 22:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- I find idiots entertaining. ;) It's also a good way to improve your own understanding of the topic. My understanding of infinitesimals is much better after trying to work out how to explain where he's been going wrong than it used to be. Oh, and I reserve slegdehammers for computers - people get AK 47's. :) --Tango (talk) 22:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 14:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Meetup
Hi there, I noticed you expressed interest in the Birmingham meetup last October. Just letting you know, another UK meetup is in planning stages, here. We need input on where and when we will meet so comments would be much appreciated. Thanks. Majorly (talk) 16:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 3 | 14 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
What should I do to undelete my article
Hallo:
You deleted my article on omnovia. If you review the article you see that it is not advertising but information about a company. There are names of competitors as well as a presentation on the general new technologies.
Would you please tell me what needs to happen for you to reconsider it?
Danke Schoen,
Peter
--Pchenomn (talk) 02:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of Damory Coaches
This is absolutely ridiculous. Plain stupid! At 21:06pm I got a message on my talk page saying that Damory had come up for speedy deletion. Now, I know that is is notable, as it was an article about a bus operator, just like any other one. Maybe it did need to show more significance in the intro - which I would have done happily. But before I could even add the "Hang-on" tag, at 21:08pm, you deleted the page. I spent around 20 minutes of my time making the article, to try and help Wikipedia expand on the Go-Ahead Group. Yet as soon as I get warned there is a small problem, I don't even get a chance to fix it. Two minutes it was, just two. No one could have got the hang on tag on the page in time, as I responded immediately. Now I was wondering whether to continue editing and help Wikipedia as it was, but this is the final bloody straw. There is no sense in what happened here at all. Why doesn't someone go and delete every bus-related article on Wikipedia. -- Arriva436 (talk) 21:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- And, if you look at the log, if was 21:07 the page was marked, so that makes it around one minute! -- Arriva436 (talk) 21:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for replying on my user page. If it would be possible, I would be very grateful if you could "undelete the article and move it to a subpage of my user page". I do realise that companies aren't automatically notable, and was working towards this, but I do accept I should have done it sooner. On the time it was deleted in, fair enough if you didn't notice, I admire administrators for what they do and I'm sure things need to be done quickly! So as I said, if you could move the page onto a subpage of my user page for me to work on it would be brilliant! Thanks -- Arriva436 (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 4 | 21 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 00:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Re: huggle
Show, or at least allow easy access to, contribs and user talk page when automatically bringing up block dialog box. (I like to make sure the previous warnings were valid before blocking.) --Tango (talk) 11:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hm. Would you prefer I make the form non-modal, so you can switch back to huggle and check the user's contribs/talk page through that, or would you prefer I add links to the block form that brought up the user's contribs/talk page in your web browser? – Gurch 12:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tango!
Since I've found you in the recent AfD on Adult-child sex not too opposed to the general idea to strengthen our encyclopedia with reliable, comprehensive, substantial, and essential material also on unpopular topics, and since you obviously have a basic grasp of German, I've been meaning to ask about your support.
A thought I've been harboring lately is putting up an essay within my userspace on the main source for my draft (which is Bleibtreu-Ehrenberg 1985/88) to one day maybe be moved to Wikipedia, WikiBooks, or WikiEssays. I'd once put this up on the German Wikipedia as an article and it held up for half a year, from May 2006 until January 2007, until someone on a personal revenge crusade removed it by means of an AfD (where votes were split 50:50 and of course most wanting to get it deleted did nothing more than point to their severe disgust, although that AfD actually lasted for 2 months before it was closed). This essay of mine was actually so influential that I found literal quotes lifted from it in a nation-wide newspaper endorsing them, that literal quotes were endorsed by a German General Medical Council, and just the same with an official brochure issued by an Austrian government department, I found my very own words in all those cases. Googling for it, I found that a number of people had saved personal backups of the article in various places on the web, and there also were several forums debating its content while linking to my article on Wikipedia.
So, I've been meaning to ask you if you'd be willing to have a look at my German essay after I'll have put it up in my userspace here on the English Wikipedia and tell me whether you think it's a good idea for me to translate it to English and for the time being leaving it as the draft of an English Wikipedia article in my userspace to one day maybe be moved to Wikipedia, WikiBooks, or WikiEssays. The basic idea of this essay of mine is a Wikipedia article on an existing work (Bleibtreu-Ehrenberg 1985/88), comparable to articles such as Civilization and Its Discontents and Dialectic of Enlightenment. --TlatoSMD (talk) 04:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- I doubt my German is good enough to be able to provide constructive criticism of an essay like that, sorry. I'm not quite sure what you intend this essay to be - is it an encyclopaedic description of the work, or an academic analysis of it? The latter would be original research and would be deleted pretty quickly. If it's the former, the only issue I can see is notability - as long as the work is notable enough to warrant an article about it, the subject matter shouldn't be an issue. The reasons given for deleting the Adult-child sex article were to do with the style of the article and the fact that much of it was duplicated, rather than the subject matter itself (although, the reasons people gave may not quite the real reasons, admittedly). --Tango (talk) 14:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's supposed to be an encylopedic description, similar in concept to the existing articles Civilization and Its Discontents and Dialectic of Enlightenment, hence I've linked the two. The notability is cleared up right at the top as being the only academic work internationally beside Feierman largely using a sociobiological approach to the subject, while being actually more comprehensive and less ethnocentric and chronocentric than Feierman. --TlatoSMD (talk) 19:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
My Rfa
My effort to regain adminship was unsuccessful, But I wanted to thank you for taking some time out of your day to voice your opinion.--MONGO 19:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 5 | 28 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Bpeps and Rollback
I was rejected once then it was given to me and then itgot took off me and then that boy went mad or something about his cousin and he refused it before his hissy fit. I'm a good editor - I just got hot with a single editor which definately did not disrupt the project or surely not disable me from having a tool which a monkey could get after a week of RC - its unfair. It really is. BpEps - t@lk 22:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Accusing someone of having a "hissy fit" is not the kind of behaviour I expect from someone requesting rollback. Learn to take "no" for an answer. Give it a month or two, there's no hurry. --Tango (talk) 22:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't accuse him of having a hissy fit he did it in front of everyone on his talk page. Wasn't my fault he went ape was it? I prayed for that guy when he was pretending to be involved in a terrible accident. Counter vandalism isn't about talk pages Tango. Its about soaping a mop and being able to deal with quick vandalism attacks quickly. Hey if I get a new account do you think it would like make be a born again wikipedian? Please give me roll back tango. no is so harsh. I've waited two weeks to ask already. BpEps - t@lk 22:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's calling it a "hissy fit" or going "ape" that's the problem - it's not an appropriate way to talk about a fellow Wikipedian. Making a new account won't help - no-one is going to award rollback to a brand new user. The fact that you seem so desperate to get it gives me serious concern - rollback isn't a reward, or a statement about you as a Wikipedian, it's a tool to help you out doing menial work. Don't make such a big deal out of it. The bigger deal you make of it, the less suitable you appear to be. --Tango (talk) 23:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- ok i agree with you Comments on rollback policy Just think its unfair the way it seems to be policed at the moment. BpEps - t@lk 23:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- It's calling it a "hissy fit" or going "ape" that's the problem - it's not an appropriate way to talk about a fellow Wikipedian. Making a new account won't help - no-one is going to award rollback to a brand new user. The fact that you seem so desperate to get it gives me serious concern - rollback isn't a reward, or a statement about you as a Wikipedian, it's a tool to help you out doing menial work. Don't make such a big deal out of it. The bigger deal you make of it, the less suitable you appear to be. --Tango (talk) 23:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't accuse him of having a hissy fit he did it in front of everyone on his talk page. Wasn't my fault he went ape was it? I prayed for that guy when he was pretending to be involved in a terrible accident. Counter vandalism isn't about talk pages Tango. Its about soaping a mop and being able to deal with quick vandalism attacks quickly. Hey if I get a new account do you think it would like make be a born again wikipedian? Please give me roll back tango. no is so harsh. I've waited two weeks to ask already. BpEps - t@lk 22:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 6 | 4 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 7 | 11 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 14:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
A couple of weeks ago, you blocked User:Justpassinby for vandalising Pure Reason Revolution. He then tried to avoid the block by sockpuppeting: see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Justpassinby. He's been making more subtle edits since, but some still seem to me to be vandalism, e.g. this one, while others strike me as gaming the system. Would you be so kind as to take a look at the situation? Bondegezou (talk) 15:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'll take a look. --Tango (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Bondegezou (talk) 15:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, I've reverted his most recent edit and suggested he discuss the problems on the talk page. He seems to be using the talk page for related issues, so I expect he will take that advice. If he continues to remove the citations without establishing a consensus on the talk page, let me know. --Tango (talk) 15:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Bondegezou (talk) 15:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 8 | 18 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 9 | 25 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Huggle User Category
Hi there. I have seen that you use huggle by the fact that you have automatically updated the huggle white list(it does this when closing huggle). I was wondering if you would add the category [[Category:Wikipedians who use Huggle]] to your user page so that it fills out and we know who actually uses huggle. If you do not want to you do not have to. I am also sorry if i have already talked to you about this or you no longer use huggle but i sent it to everyone that has edited the page since mid January. I hope we can start to fill out this category. If you would like to reply to this message then please reply on my talk page as i will probably not check here again. Thanks. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 18:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 10 | 3 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
wikipedia email
could you possibly go in your preferences (in the top right of the screen) and enable an email address where users can mail you? You could use a hotmail or similar type which you've made solely for the purpose, that way it wouldn't breach any privacy. Only I could then send you that link.:) The special, the random, the lovely Merkinsmum 19:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- I thought I did have email enabled... very odd... I've done it now. --Tango (talk) 19:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- You have mail.:) The special, the random, the lovely Merkinsmum 19:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 13th and 17th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 11 | 13 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 12 | 17 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 02:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 13 | 24 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Your revert on 0.999....
"revert - should say "real", by denseness, rational is still true, but for the rest of of the sentence to make sense, it needs to be real"
x is infinitesimal if for every natural number n, nx < 1. In other word x is infinitesimal if x is smaller than 1/n for every natural number. Thus x is infinitesimal if it's smaller than every positive rational number. Sentence makes more sense with rational.
- But if it's only smaller than every positive rational, that leaves open the possibility that it's still a positive real, since the reals are larger than the rationals. The sentence goes on to talk about the Archimedean property of the reals, so it needs to be a real number for that to make sense. Just relying on the rationals being Archimedean isn't enough, since that would still allow infinitesimal reals. --Tango (talk) 16:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Vandalism in articlespace from indef blocked user?
How is this possible if you've blocked him?LeadSongDog (talk) 05:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- Interesting. It looks like I blocked him a few seconds after another admin did, that admin only blocking for 24 hours, and his is the one that took. A slight bug in the program I use for vandal fighting, it seems - it shouldn't have posted the notification. I'll check his contributions and see what should be done now. Thanks for letting me know. --Tango (talk) 12:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 14 | 31 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 22:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Busy next Sunday?
Meetup? Hope it's not too short notice. Majorly (talk) 14:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi tango
can you please prove that that user:dark3345 has nothing to do with me please. im getting quite upset by admins being absolutely convinced that it was me. check out the link below. thanks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dark3345&action=edit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.215.172 (talk) 19:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- How am I meant to do that? The evidence is not in your favour. --Tango (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
well what if that user had tried to frame me making death threats or something, surely it could have been proved then. I wish someone would check it out, because i'ts either a total coincidence, or it might be one of the other admins from our thread today i dont know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.215.172 (talk) 19:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'll request a "checkuser" at WP:RFCU. Someone will check what IP addresses the account has been using and say if they are in the same range as the ones you've been using. If they are, that (in addition to the similarities in your writing style) is pretty conclusive proof that it is you. If they aren't, it doesn't tell us much - it could just mean you used a different computer. Proving two accounts are not related is pretty much impossible - the best we can do is show it's unlikely. Let's see what happens. --Tango (talk) 19:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Checkuser says you are unrelated: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dark3345. I guess it was just a strange coincidence. Hopefully we can all move on now.--Tango (talk) 19:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks for checking that out for me. I dont think it was a coincidence, i think it must have been a deliberate hoax. Anyway, danke schoen fur deine hilfe und gute nacht. Ich muss jetzt arbeit weil ich habe mein a levels in etwas ein monat! Und ja, Deutch ist ein von meine faecher! :-S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.133.250 (talk) 20:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
On the subject of your block this morning
While I disagree with the block you performed, the length of the block, and the rationale you provided, I want you to know I deeply respect and appreciate any admin trying to keep the pedia safe from incivility. I would also concur that some users push that envelope with more regularity and more severity than others, and concede that User:MONGO is a rowdier cowboy than many. MONGO is also a vastly experienced and savvy editor who chooses to walk a particularly dark beat, and generally speaking protects visible and important pagespace daily from the most vicious of vandals, actual trolls. He daily takes on administrative service and acts like a responsible admin, even without community endorsement or a toolkit. If I had any specific issue with your action, it was that you could have just as easily left a simple few friendly words, and those few words, coming from an uninvolved admin, would have carried some weight, and you might have had a more positive impact, with less molehill/mountain confusion. I just endorse a less process-oriented approach with MONGO in the future. BusterD (talk) 16:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. If I thought a few friendly words would have had any effect, that's what I would have done. People have had such words with MONGO plenty of times in the past, and he hasn't learnt. I decided more affirmative action was required. --Tango (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- I appreciate that MONGO's good faith dedication to being MONGO makes life more complicated from time to time, but the question becomes: did YOU ever had those few friendly words with MONGO? Don't you feel that you both being trusted and well-recognized users, you have an obligation to have a few civil words before lobbing a drive-by incivility warning on his talk for using WP:SPADE in the context of a hugely complex discussion? I don't mean to press this any farther (and MONGO, people love ya, but sometimes we tire of defending you from the same minor charge over and over), but in the case of extremely experienced users, first-level warnings seem somewhat insulting. BusterD (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
In my opinion, people like you being Admins are a liability to the project. Giano (talk) 18:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- Giano, is Tango up for recall? 88.110.157.68 (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd vote for recall. Tango didn't understnad the context of what he injected himself into. Thomas Basbol posted to MONGO's talk page when he has repeatedley been asked not to by MONGO. MONGO reverted him for trolling as he has done a number of times to this editor because, frankly, this editor trolls MONGO to get a rise out of him. Basbol complained about his actions being described as trolling (Basbol acknowledges that his account is a SPA so that is not an issue). Basbol tried to get an incivil comment out of my talk page as well. Tango warned MONGO about being incivil. MONGO reverted Tango's warning and basically told him he was a crappy admin for not understanding the whole situation and to get lost. Tango then blocked MONGO. --DHeyward (talk) 20:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you all for your opinions. They are noted. --Tango (talk) 20:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- You blocked for too long, yes, but he needed to be blocked. People have tip-toed around problems like this too long. I know where I stand: the need for cooperation is being greater than even the need for content. Many people can do good work, but they have to be able to do good work here. You're the kind of admin we need for situations like this, but it's easier to defend actions like blocks when they are moderate and proportional. DGG (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry if I appeared too harsh in my judgement of the TARIFF (Just in case zat Guy is reading) that you initially imposed on MONGO, but events bore out my observation here. Upon review I was also too lenient in my initial suggestion, and the 31 hour duration seems appropriate in context. I also think that you are correct in both applying the warning per ArbCom enforcement, and then acting upon it when it was immediately violated. I think you did, and am doing, the right thing. If this matter has given you pause to think that you might as for a quick review before acting similarly, then I would be pleased to provide an opinion. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC) (and this is precisely the reason why I am not open to recall, it is never going to be called upon dispassionately).
Thank you all for your opinions. They are noted. :-) --Tango (talk) 23:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- If you read the header to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement there is one caution to administrators which I think you'll now recognize the truth of "you should expect reactive behavior from those banned." As with any block, arbitration enforcement blocks tend to bring reaction from the blockee. Unfortunately, it the mess made it to arbitration in the first place, there is usually a lack of consensus in the administrative community, so you often also get reactive behavior from the peanut gallery. Good luck dealing with it. My personal preference is to cut a little extra slack in terms of response to arbitration enforcement actions, but I suspect I am in the minority on that point, and don't even succeed all the time myself. Think about your long run plan, should you intend to continue engaging in arbitration enforcement. GRBerry 01:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- I request recall as well. After what I read on ANI, I have no confidence in you possessing the mop. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 03:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- I too request your recall as an administrator. ➪HiDrNick! 04:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe I'm missing something, but could somebody point me to where Tango has indicated he/she is open for recall? - auburnpilot talk 04:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- IMHO, this has all gotten way out of hand and way off-track. In my mind, this entire incident is about overreaction. MONGO overreacted while trying to deal with an admitted SPA. Tango felt compelled to react by posting a caution on his talk. MONGO had every right to deal his talk page any way he wanted, so he deleted the warning, and overreacted by saying Tango should be deadminned. Tango next overreacted by blocking MONGO a week. In discussion since then, Tango has been subjected to what I'll characterize as abusive comments from lots of what I normally consider pretty good editors. Overreaction. Less tried to end this in ANI talk this morning, but for some reason many people still want to pile on Tango. Now some are asking for recall. Overreaction. Overreaction is why MONGO has posted a retired notice on his user page (again). Sometimes I wish we could offer cool-down blocks (my pathetic attempt at irony). BusterD (talk) 05:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe I'm missing something, but could somebody point me to where Tango has indicated he/she is open for recall? - auburnpilot talk 04:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
You're wasting your time - I'm not open to recall. There is an ArbCom case filed against me (unless it's already been rejected - I haven't looked yet). If you want my mop, go over there and say so. --Tango (talk) 13:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
After reading much of the AN/I page it seems you made the correct decision. While it may have been your first civility warning, and a little long for a block, it seems the targets Arbitration and previous desysopping, showed a repeated issue with incivility. Hopefully you do not even consider leaving this project as the majority of people seem to believe you were correct. I hate to see good people driven off of the project for standing up for civil behavior. If you have a moment within all of this drama, please let me know the process one under goes to become and admin, preferable on my talk page if possible. Take care and keep your head high in knowing you made the correct decision. --I Write Stuff (talk) 14:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Requests for arbitration
Please see [3] bishzilla ROARR!! 21:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC).
MONGO
Tango, I've discussed MONGO's block with the latest blocking admin, Orderinchaos, who doesn't mind if it's reviewed and undone. I would like to undo it entirely, because it has led to significant bad feeling, and because you and MONGO had been in dispute before over an uncivil edit summary (you posting it, him warning you). As MONGO has said he's retiring, it seems unnecessary to keep it going. Do you have strong objections to my unblocking? SlimVirgin talk|edits 02:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hi again, this is let you know that I've unblocked, as there was significant concern about the block. I've left a comment here. I'd have preferred to wait until you were back online, but given that he'd already served 16 hours, and seems to have left because of the block, I felt it was important to undo it reasonably soon.
- I completely support you in your concern about civility on the project, and I also support what you were saying about not wanting to see the definition of "involved" extended too much. However, I feel that people telling admins to "get lost," while not ideal, is not the place to start if we want to fight incivility, especially not when the editor is a long-term user in good standing, and when the comment was made while removing a post from his own talk page. We regularly let a great deal worse than that slide. I also feel that you've had a few run-ins with MONGO, which should have made you hesitate to block him unless the offence was particularly egregious.
- Having said that, I see no reason not to believe you acted in good faith. I think this was just a mistake, and we all make them, so I hope both you and MONGO can put it behind you. SlimVirgin talk|edits 06:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- Good block (in that it prevented further misbehaviour from an editor with a long term behaviour problem). Terrible unblock (in that there was no consensus at AN/I or anywhere else that the revised block was unjust). Unblocking someone because they "have left" (how many times has MONGO "left" now? Every time he doesn't get his way, basically) is a particularly bad precedent to set. When MONGO next returns and starts being uncivil with someone because he doesn't like their edits, presumably Slim will take on responsibility for dealing with it? MONGO has only survived here so long because he has his fan club (or, to use one of his words, "enablers"), and here we see it again. Don't let the carping and criticism get you down; what you did was brave and just. Well done. --John (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- It gives me the chills that administrators are allowed to talk like this. This mentality is destructive and hurts the entire project. 216.37.86.10 (talk) 15:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Good block (in that it prevented further misbehaviour from an editor with a long term behaviour problem). Terrible unblock (in that there was no consensus at AN/I or anywhere else that the revised block was unjust). Unblocking someone because they "have left" (how many times has MONGO "left" now? Every time he doesn't get his way, basically) is a particularly bad precedent to set. When MONGO next returns and starts being uncivil with someone because he doesn't like their edits, presumably Slim will take on responsibility for dealing with it? MONGO has only survived here so long because he has his fan club (or, to use one of his words, "enablers"), and here we see it again. Don't let the carping and criticism get you down; what you did was brave and just. Well done. --John (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Break
Tango, Given the current situation, maybe it would be best if you considered a break, or change of pace for awhile. Possibly there are some other hobbies that you enjoy. You have good faith and everyone appreciates your attempts to resolve issues. There is no need to defend yourself, its just that some are better than others at resolving problems. I wish you the best in whatever endeavor you choose. Thank you. This is the only contribution by this ip account. LessHeard vanU (talk) 16:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Request for comment
I have filed a request for comment at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tango. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 15:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- I strongly suggest that you ignore this RfC, in its current incarnation, per my talkpage comment. If somebody manages to word a neutral Request that notes MONGO's history as well as your own, the ArbCom from which this incident arose, as well as your conduct as an admin and contributor overall, as being part of the remit, then it should be considered on its merits. As is, this RfC attempts to legitimise a lynching. LessHeard vanU (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
RfC etc.
Just a quick note to say thanks for what you did in re MONGO. I'm sorry about the trouble it has caused, and I don't know much about the technicalities that people are accusing you of violating, but the effect on the progress of the article is noticable. MONGO was prevented from turning the talk page into the familiar battleground that the ArbCom decision was designed to avoid. The dispute has been resolved and the tag removed (not by me). In this light, I think those who call your block punitive are very wrong (though I'm no doubt too involved for my opinion to count). The block was a fitting response to his rejection of the warning and continuation of the behaviour he was warned to stop.--Thomas Basboll (talk) 09:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- It was all worthwhile then. Thank you for letting me know. :-) --Tango (talk) 13:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- "Just a quick note to say thanks for what you did in re MONGO". Interesting comment, very interesting indeed. Minkythecat (talk) 10:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Civility restriction on MONGO
Dear Tango,
Can you please remove your civility restriction on MONGO?
Thanks, Andjam (talk) 22:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- I rather I didn't, because that'd mean criticising you. But if you promise not to block me...
- The restriction, longer than anything handed by arbcom, is tainted by controversy. Admin consensus is that, at the very least, you blocked MONGO too long. (But least you're happy that you've pleased someone who has made personal attacks on MONGO) Do you think the 1-week block won't be mentioned whenever someone tries to enforce the civility restriction? If MONGO is as bad as you think (s)he is, then why not wait until another admin, who has dotted the "i"s and crossed the "t"s, to place a civility restriction on MONGO the next time MONGO is out of line? Thanks, Andjam (talk) 22:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- It's not longer than anything handed by ArbCom - it's indefinite. That means the length is yet to be determined. It can be removed when MONGO demonstrates it is no longer needed. That could be next week, it could be never. Your point that it may be difficult to enforce it given the controversy of its imposition is a valid one - let's at least wait for the ArbCom case to be over before doing anything. Once they've made their rulings, a discussion at AN/I or AE can be had to determine what to do about the restriction (remove it, or endorse it). It can be removed without my consent if there is a consensus to do so - I will not oppose any such attempt (although I may offer my opinion in the discussion). --Tango (talk) 22:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- The restriction, longer than anything handed by arbcom, is tainted by controversy. Admin consensus is that, at the very least, you blocked MONGO too long. (But least you're happy that you've pleased someone who has made personal attacks on MONGO) Do you think the 1-week block won't be mentioned whenever someone tries to enforce the civility restriction? If MONGO is as bad as you think (s)he is, then why not wait until another admin, who has dotted the "i"s and crossed the "t"s, to place a civility restriction on MONGO the next time MONGO is out of line? Thanks, Andjam (talk) 22:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- An indefinite restriction could be stopped tomorrow. But so could a hundred-year restriction, as wikipedia does not have Truth in sentencing, nor should it. Andjam (talk) 23:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
|
The Resilient Barnstar | |
| thanks. Trav (talk) 01:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 09:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 15 | 7 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 16 | 14 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tango/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tango/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, John Vandenberg (chat) 11:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 17 | 21 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 18 | 2 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 19 | 9 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 20 | 12 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The Arbitration Committee finds that Tango has made a number of problematic blocks. It also states that Tango's administrative privileges are to be revoked, and may be reinstated at any time either through the usual means or by appeal to the Committee. John Vandenberg (chat) 02:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Question
Hi Tango, I reviewed your recent use of rollback, and found that you used rollback correctly: to revert vandalism. Would you like to be granted rollback rights? I don't see any reason not to give you them, apart from you maybe not wanting them. Best wishes. Acalamari 21:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Shitty deal
I am a little shocked at the result of the arbcom case. The whole case seems contradictory. A rule being created and applied retroactively, other offenses being over 4 months past, I just have to say that your desysoping seems punitive not preventative.
I am taking a nice long break from my admin tools, since it has become apparent to me that you can lose your bit for breaking a rule you had no way of knowing existed. I would hate to lose my tools because I violated a common sense fact that is not that common of a fact(or in this case not documented or discussed at all).
I try to have respect for arbcom, but this just seems whacked. It has been near impossible in the past to enforce civility on certain users with friends in high places, and now it has become clear that enforcing civility on certain people can lead to losing one's bit. Even if that is not arbcom's goal, the appearance of such a consequence is clear.
It has been said by arbcom that even if you did act objectively in the block of Mongo that the appearance of misconduct was there. If we are concerned about appearance and not just conduct then by the same token even if arbcom did sincerely think desysoping was a preventative measure, it has the strong appearance of being punitive.
What really galls me is that they went from a suspension to outright desysoping apparently because you argued against their brand spanking new rule on the talk page, saying that the community has never embraced such a rule. It seems to be that you are being punished for clinging to the reality that no such rule exists. Well, the arb in arbcom stands for arbitrary so I guess they can do that. It just seems to me to be a case of "This is the way the Wiki is, there is nothing on the wiki to show it, but it is real non-the-less, accept it or we will increase your punishment". Reality is such a funny thing
Wikipedia is not better off for this decision, it would have been far better if arbcom has addressed the issues leading to Mongo's block such as his incivility.
There is really nothing I can do about it but stop using my tools, I doubt it will have much effect but all I have to offer is my effort and that is all I have to take away. Peace. 1 != 2 13:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- That's life, I guess... I'm completely baffled by it all. They removed my bit because I don't understand what I've done wrong - they're absolutely right! I was never the most active of admins anyway, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. --Tango (talk) 14:26, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Well I also don't understand it, so I should not be using my bit either. 1 != 2 14:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- I just came across this because I made reference to this case in a comment about an improper block made by User:Edokter, and decided to see how Tango was doing. It's a bit ironic. You got it. They removed your bit because you didn't understand what you had done wrong, and therefore you could not be trusted to not repeat the error, and it was a truly serious error. I will make an attempt to explain, and this is purely in an effort to help you understand, I'm not involved.
- You used your tools, as I recall the case, because you considered MONGO's response to your warning on his own Talk page uncivil. User incivility on his own talk page is rarely an emergency, so if you considered his incivility to you to be a problem, then it was your duty to refrain from using your tools. Users often will react with anger to being warned, and, pretty much, they can say what they like on their own Talk page (at least MONGO's response did not go beyond what they can do.) If you drop a warning on a user talk page, and they respond "Fuck you!", that response is irrelevant, in fact. The incivility is a separate offense, if it is an offense, and it is not one for you to judge. If they ignore the warning, then you can block for the primary offense. If you even mention the incivility, it will look like retaliation, and, besides, it is irrelevant, so you don't mention it. In your defense, some argued that a user could avoid being blocked by simply insulting the administrator, but that's not true. You warn a user not to edit war. They insult you. They edit war. You block them for edit warring. Nobody would challenge this on the basis that you were retaliating for the insult. (Sensibly, in fact, if someone insults you for warning them, the best response is to laugh. "Very funny. But don't ignore the warning.") And a ladder of mirrors is not created. If you are seriously insulted by a user, you warn the user and go to AN/I. Warning isn't an administrative function, and warning notices don't even say, "I'm an admin, watch out!" An uninvolved administrator watches the situation. If the user insults you again after the warning, that second administrator blocks, no additional warning is needed.
- I think that because of animosity toward MONGO, you got some bad advice from your friends (or, more accurately, from his enemies). I recall trying to warn you then about this. [User:Until (1 == 2)]]'s comment above, if he ever makes the same mistake, could be used against him. I.e., he shouldn't be using his bit in any similar situation, and, that he could say what he said, after all the explanation that was made about this, is worrying. I'd urge him, as well, if he reads this, to think about it. ArbComm's decision was quite predictable, see the case of User:Physchim62. If you are able to revise your opinion, and want your bit back, I think that all you'd have to do is to show ArbComm that you really do understand it now, and would not, therefore, make the same mistake again.
Request for Peer Review help
Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.
1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...
2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.
3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.
Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
- I haven't actually done any peer review work since I added my name to that list - I haven't been contacted. I thought the idea was that someone would contact me when an article on a subject I'm interested in came up, and then I'd help review it. I'm not really interested in reviewing random articles from a backlog list... --Tango (talk) 21:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
RE: WP:RD/S suicide question
Perhaps leave your opinions on his/her talk page? I know I may seem a tad paranoid about this but I really don't feel comfortable giving any access to that sort of knowledge in a place where anyone in any emotional situation could see it. Regards, CycloneNimrod talk?contribs? 16:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Spam in Chapter 9 (band)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Chapter 9 (band), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Chapter 9 (band) is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Chapter 9 (band), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 22:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 23 | 2 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Vectors and scalars
Are you sure that you want to give the guy an answer to his homework 'for free' over on WP:RD/S? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:40, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- I wasn't sure if it was a homework question or not, usually I would have given a vague answer and just pointed him in the right direction, but I couldn't think of any way to do that without just giving the answer. --Tango (talk) 16:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 24 | 9 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Good one
Diff. I seriously laughed out loud at this one. Plus the memory of the look of horror on my maths I lecturer's face when someone wrote that down may have helped. He was a really passive guy and, being a lecturer, he was quite eccentric so when he responded with "Now what the bloody hell does this mean?", my friend and I sprinted out of the room to have a laugh. Thanks. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 19:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- Why, what happens?68.148.164.166 (talk) 20:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- See that thread on the Maths desk. When it's -1, it means one thing and when it's 2, it means something totally different. So when it's -2, it's very unclear. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 20:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
pubes
- Also, my hair acts as an asymtote; it just drops off in length away from the areola, so is that normal?68.148.164.166 (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds normal to me. If you're concerned, you should see a doctor, but what you describe sounds perfectly normal to me, especially if the hair has only grown recently - more may grow in time and spread away from the areola, but then again, it may not, it varies from man to man. --Tango (talk) 21:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- Also, my hair acts as an asymtote; it just drops off in length away from the areola, so is that normal?68.148.164.166 (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 23 and 26, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 25 | 23 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 26 | 26 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 30, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 27 | 30 June 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 7, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 28 | 7 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Stargate
|
Hello, Tango! Your username, as well as the usernames of other members of Wikipedia: WikiProject Stargate, has been moved to the inactive members list, as part of a process for update the activity of the wikiproject. If you would like to continue to be an active member, please follow the instructions on the top of the participants page to add your name to the active participants list. |
Speak truth to power
Well said sir [4]. DuncanHill (talk) 21:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you. --Tango (talk) 21:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, what he said. Algebraist 23:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Seconded. Celarnor Talk to me 01:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 29 | 14 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| From the editor: Transparency | ||
| WikiWorld: "Goregrind" | Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block | |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation | ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 30 | 21 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
|
The Reference Desk Barnstar | |
| Thanks for helping me on the Mathematics Reference Desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 17:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC) |
In particular, you and Oded did much more than the others, so you both also recieve:
|
The Guidance Barnstar | |
| for persistence and particularly useful help with my problem. :-) --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 17:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC) |
Ref Desk troll
Hi Tango. I pulled the buggery question from ExplodingAnus again--it was a post from the banned troll Light current, who has a long history of trolling and disruption on the Desks.
I don't mind that you were assuming good faith, but this is a known banned troll. (Do bear in mind the limits of WP:AGF, though—even if one doesn't know about Light current, is it really unreasonable to conclude that a new account called ExplodingAnus is a troll, given that his second edit is to bluelink his userpage and his third is to ask a question about buggery?) Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
(To be clear, I do know that I didn't name him in the revert summary; in the past we've found that he likes to get as much attention and recognition as possible, so we're doing as strict a WP:RBI as possible. I apologize for any confusion that might cause, and I appreciate that it might be a bit confusing and abrupt for good-faith editors – like you – who might not be familiar with the circumstances around the case. I apologise for taking out your answer with the section.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm vaguely familiar with Light current, but I'm not sure how you can know that was him. Personally, I think the best way to deal with such trolls is to assume good faith and just answer their questions. He's trying to annoy us, RBI just shows him he's succeeding. If we just take him seriously and answer his questions, perhaps he'll get bored. --Tango (talk) 17:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 06:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 31 | 28 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 32 | 9 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 33 | 11 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 34 | 18 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| From the editor: Help wanted | ||
| WikiWorld: "Cashew" | Dispatches: Choosing Today's Featured Article | |
| Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation | ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd appreciate your input about WP:RD/H query content
...here, regarding this. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 05:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Again!
|
|
The Reference Desk Barnstar | |
| Thanks for the sand idea for our missing frog! We haven't caught him yet, but the traps are still laid out. Thanks again!--Ye Olde Luke (talk) 02:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC) |
Wikimedia UK chapter
I realise I could probably find the answer online if I tried, but I'm feeling lazy (feel free to tell me to fuck off if you want). What, exactly, does a local Wikimedia chapter actually do? Algebraist 01:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- It general terms, it supports the goals of the the Wikimedia Foundation and community in the local country. This includes fundraising (a UK chapter can claim back the tax on donations from UK tax payers, which is a big benefit), organising events to publicise Wikimedia, dealing with the media, teaching people how to use Wikimedia projects, making partnerships with local content owners to release their content, that kind of stuff. Basically, it will help the local community with whatever activities it thinks of doing by providing funds and looking important so other important people take notice ("I'm the CEO of Wikimedia UK." sounds far better than "I'm a geek that wastes my life writing about Pokemon on a website." ;)). meta:Local chapter FAQ might be of interest. --Tango (talk) 01:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Countably many thanks for your time. Algebraist 01:43, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
RE:Co-founder
Thanks for the kind head's up. It just seemed to contradict every other page on Wikipedia. But now that I just checked, the Jimmy Wales article also says he co-founded Wikipedia, which must have been changed recently. I'll self-revert for now. Do you know where I can find more information on this? If it was changed recently, there must have been rationale to do so. Thanks again. -- penubag (talk) 07:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- The Larry Sanger article has some details on the dispute. I'm not sure when the decision was made to add the "co-" to Jimmy's article, you would have to look through the history. The discussion probably took place on that article's talk page. --Tango (talk) 07:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 35 | 25 August 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 36 | 8 September 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Zimbabwean dollar devalued rate
See the link here. This link is References of Zimbabwean dollar, which sentence is On 6 September 2007 the Zimbabwe dollar was devalued by 1200%. It says it's 1200%.--이형주 (talk) 11:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, The Times doesn't know what it's talking about then. Even if the calculation was done like that, it's 12,000%, not 1,200%. 30,000/250=120 and 120*100=12,000. I don't see any meaningful calculation that gets 1200%. --Tango (talk) 15:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
RefDesk notice
Per this discussion, I've rejigged this SciRef thread, in the process removing your helpful post among other unhelpful ones (which included my own unhelpful posts). Hope this is OK. Franamax (talk) 01:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I think you missed a word
between "should" and "write" --Versageek 08:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK 2.0 Voting is open :-)
A warm hello to all those signed up as guarantor members of the soon-to-be-rebooted UK chapter! Voting is now open over at meta - there's tons of information online over there, and the mailing list has been very active too. Discussion, comment (and even the inevitable technical gremlins!) are most welcome at the meta pages, otherwise please do send in your vote/s, and tell a friend about the chapter too :-) Privatemusings (talk) 22:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)I'm not actually involved in the election workings, and am just dropping these notes in to help try and spread the word :-) I welcome any or all comment too, but 'election related' stuff really is better suited to the meta pages :-)
Draconian editing style
Okay, granted, I'd not seen the box about the arguments page for the 0.999 article. But there was no need for you to just move my discussion post without any justification. It was only after I undid your move that you even bothered to suggest a reason... and you directed me, quite unhelpfully to a box. It seems, after reading some of the other posts on your own discussions page, that this is not the first time you have adopted such an attitude. I suggest, for the good of the community, that you change your approach. You are not God and you need to explain to users why you have done what you have done. That is, of course, unless you wish to have your admin status revoked.
Declan Davis (talk) 23:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- You'll be pleased to hear, my admin status was revoked several months ago. I assumed you would follow the link, read the notice at the top of the arguments page and be able to work out for yourself why I moved it. Why didn't you do that? --Tango (talk) 23:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- As I already said: I didn't see the box. After reading your last comment I can see that you're just proving my point for me: you're a bad tempered and generally unhelpful individual. People spend time and effort contributing to Wikipedia, and for you to just stamp on people's sand castles without a care in the world is terrible. Okay, fair enough, some of those sand castles may need to be demolished for one reason or another, but at least take the time and effort to explain the reasons to people. Don't just expect them to read the eviction notice and work it out for themselves... that's just cold. Have a nice evening.
- Declan Davis (talk) 23:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- I meant the box at the top of the Arguments page. If you were confused as to why I'd moved your comment there, I would think the first thing you would do is to read that page and find out what it's all about. Your comments were in no way intended to improve Wikipedia, you were just disputing a universally (within the mathematical community) accepted fact. I would have been justified in just deleting the comment in accordance with WP:TALK, instead I moved it to a page we created specially to cater specifically for such arguments. I assumed a certain amount of initiative on your part in being able to work out why I'd done that - the information was right in front of you, after all. The reason I'm not being particularly friendly towards you is because of the extreme arrogance your comment showed - the people devoting significant amounts of time explaining in careful detail why this mathematical fact is the way it is clearly know far more about the subject than you, otherwise you wouldn't be disagreeing with every mathematician in existence. Undergraduate study is plenty to understand the concepts - I learned them in 1st year and I believe most mathematics courses include basic real analysis in their first years. If you want people to help you clear up your misconceptions, it would help to show a little respect to their greater understanding. --Tango (talk) 23:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- Declan Davis (talk) 23:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- It can't possibly be a universally accepted fact. I am a research mathematician and I disagree with the statement. Limits and equalities are different things all together; that's A-level maths. The comments made by some people (who turned out to be undergraduates) repeated the same mistakes that turn up in my pigeon hole week after week when it's homework day. Your use of the phrase mathematical fact is also very worrying. It's not a fact. The limit tends to one, but that's it. Also to say that you aren't friendly towards me because of my arrogance, and then show arrogance towards me... pot calling the kettle black? Once again, have a nice day.
- Declan Davis (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- I agree; let's! Declan Davis (talk) 23:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm getting a little worried about your authority on matters mathematical. From reading your posts you seem to have problems with εδ-proofs, not to mention the defintion of a continuous function. What did you say? "It's just plain wierd"? May I ask: what is your mathematical background, and what makes you feel that your are such an authority on all things mathematical?
Declan Davis (talk) 01:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- Maths doesn't require authority, that's the beauty of it. Either a proof is valid, or it isn't, it doesn't matter who wrote it. The 0.999... thing is just a matter of definition, and the definition used in our article is the one universally accepted. If you can find a paper that says otherwise, let me know. --Tango (talk) 10:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- So the short answer is that you have very little professional mathematical experience, and as such are not an authority on the subject. Thanks for clearing that up. Have a nice day. Declan Davis (talk) 12:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 37 | 15 September 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK 2.0 Vote
Hi you signed up as being interested in being a memeber of wikimedia UK 2.0. Just a reminder the that the vote for the inital board at m:Wikimedia UK v2.0/Vote ends next Saturday (September 25th).Geni 03:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
London 14
Following your participation the other Sunday, you may be interested to know that London 14 is scheduled for Sunday October 12 incase you weren't already aware. Best, WilliamH (talk) 11:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks ;-) notafish }<';> 15:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
FYI
User:Declan Davis and User:Dharma6662000 are the same person; [5] suffices to demonstrate it. I've issued an ultimatum to pick one account; we'll see what he does. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Easy as pi?: Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership
The discussion, to which you contributed, has been archived, with very much additional commentary,
at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 35#Easy as pi? (subsectioned and sub-subsectioned).
A related discussion is at
(Temporary link) Talk:Mathematics#Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership and
(Permanent link) Talk:Mathematics (Section "Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership").
Another related discussion is at
(Temporary link) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership and
(Permanent link) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics (Section "Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership").
-- Wavelength (talk) 01:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Venus' fate
What about Venus' fate. I've elarnt Venus can also escape, but even if Venus escapes I thgoht the planet condition will just be worse. Venus' fate is not quite certain yet I thought. What you menat by eventually all planets will be flung out orbits. Will they drift away? So when sun becomes a white dwarf, it's gas will stay?--SCFReeways 00:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- What happen to Venus I thoguht have some questions. I thoguht Venus may also widen orbits. I seen few sources say Venus will actually survvie over white dwarf. Even if Venus still exist over white dwarf, I thought Venus will just be frozen, dark, and deep cold.--SCFReeways 00:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Am I right saying this? Veuns fate is not that certain yet. If Venus still exist over sun's giant stage then it's surface will be total molten, all the atmospher' will totally been gone.--SCFReeways 00:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- (For future reference, it's best to keep follow up questions on the ref desk so anyone can answer.) I think there is a chance Venus' orbit could expand enough for it to escape, but it's less likely that for the Earth. When the Sun collapses to a white dwarf it's outer layers will be shed and will become a planetary nebula, which will quickly dissipate. The remaining planets (whichever ones survive) will become cold and dead (except maybe Jupiter and Saturn which may be able to generate their own heat for a while longer, I'm not sure how much longer they will generate heat for, they may have already stopped by then). --Tango (talk) 01:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks at the ref-desk
I truly got more educational value out of this than the OP. I got carried away answering this question, because I just learned the stuff today. On the ref desk page, i called my losses, and read those links, and found out how completely wrong I was. However, I'll have for the rest of my life a better understanding of science. Thanks for all your help at the ref desk, even when I was wrong you were kind about it. That's the best way to not kill one's enthusiasm. Sentriclecub (talk) 04:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments - knowing you've helped someone understand something makes all the hours spent on Ref Desk worthwhile! --Tango (talk) 17:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Megalomania
Hi, Tango. I thought I'd made it fairly clear that my "secret fantasy" was nothing more than a joke. My more serious subsequent contributions were not though. But I still thought I'd made it clear that suggesting people think about taking different seats was just that, a suggestion. An encouragement at most. I hardly think this amounts to megalomania. If you believe that, maybe you'd better come to one of my classes about the meanings of English words. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 03:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- The first bit, making every move once they were all settled down for no reason other than to make them respect you sounds very much like megalomania to me. I'm glad to here it was a joke. --Tango (talk) 12:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well, of course it was a joke, my friend. I thought you would have had a better understanding of me by now. Did you possibly think I was actually serious with statements like "They'd soon find out who's boss", and "by then I would have achieved the level of respect I demand"? Did the double smiley immediately after those words not mean anything to you? Did "But in all seriousness" not tell you that what had gone before was not said with seriousness? What more could I have done to ensure this was not misinterpreted? I don't want this to become a big issue, but your message about megalomania did come across as very stern, and it troubled me that I could have been misread that way. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Europa and Titan
Let me backtrack a little bit. Titan have a dense orange gas, and it's sky is like pale orange, and it's atmosph bar is 1.5 times greater than ours. How would Titan drain it's atmos when the sun heats up. Titan may not be a blue planet but Titan is bigger than Mercury so it will be big enoough to hold an atmos. I wonder if Eurpa even have an magnetic field. Europa is definietly too small to hold an atmos, I thought you meant when sun heats up Europa's ice will just evaporate into a desert like our Moon.--SCFReeways 23:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think you may be a little confused, Mercury doesn't have an atmosphere. The reason Mercury doesn't have one and Titan does, even though they are similar sizes, is that Mercury is much near the Sun so is hotter and is exposed to more solar wind. When the Sun becomes a red giant, it will heat Titan up and expose it to more solar wind which is why I believe it will lose its atmosphere. But you're right about Europa - my understanding is that if it gets hot enough to melt the ice it will just evaporate off leaving just rock behind. --Tango (talk) 23:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- I know Mercury is closer to sun. I say mercury is total airless. This is another story. When Mercury is on the daytime side it can get as hot as 430 C or 810 F, when mercury goes away from sun Mercury falls bitterly and terribly cold of as cold as -200 C or -330 F is intensely colder than most moons of Jupiter. Everything on Mercury like sodium, nickel, is all fake gases. By 5 to 6 billion-year time Titan's atmos may almost be as thin as Pluto, I don't know about turning the sky black, but the surface tmp may still be as cold s Greenland or Antartica on Earth. I understand is only it's surface temp will be habitable, universally still uninhabitiable. In about 3 billion year-time if human exist the best thing to do is find another solar system.--SCFReeways 23:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- Just because it's a habitable temperature doesn't mean it's habitable. It may still be possible to colonise it, it would just require a big dome to keep the air in. There would be decent solar power, at least. That is, until the sun collapses into a white dwarf, which wouldn't be long on an astronomical scale. If the human race survives 3 billion years they will probably want to think a little more long term than just the next few million years, so yes, finding a new solar system would be good. Either that, or find a way to live without the sun - fusion power generation might do it, the raw materials will still be in the solar system even once the sun is dead. --Tango (talk) 23:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Earth becoming Venus
From Formation and evolution of the solar system article it have mention Earth surface will eventually become like Venus in about 2 or 3 billion years. Is this terribly likely? our planet will become pale yellow prior to the time it drives off it's atmosph or it's atmosp will just get thinner until it completely loses it atmos. I wonder how will Earth atmos get thicker when have stuff to do with solar wind?--SCFReeways 00:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if the atmosphere will get much thicker, but if the planet warms up the oceans will evaporate releasing lots of water vapour and dissolved CO2 into the the atmosphere, which are both greenhouse gasses. That could cause a runaway effect similar to that seen on Venus. Combined with the Sun's increased output we could get temperatures on the same scale as Venus. The same could happen to a lesser extent on Mars (there aren't large oceans to evaporate, but there are polar ice caps with frozen CO2 which could sublime) which would help it warm up. I doubt enough could be released to produce an air pressure capable of supporting people without spacesuits, though. --Tango (talk) 10:09, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Pluto's axial tilt
Is Pluto tilt axial of 60 degs or 120 degs? If Pluto is rtro will the tilt be 60 or 120?--Freeway91 01:08, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Plutos' core
Is Pluto's core generally hot or cold? From this image, it said the center is made of alloy, iron-nickel, and the mantle is rock and ice. I thouhgt Pluto's core would not be hotter than the surface of Venus, but may still be warm enough for water to become a steam? Since Pluto's atmosp is only 1/1000 of Earth's fraction, the globe colour would be gray perhaps yellow-tan or orange-yellow tinge add to the gray.--Freeway19 00:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Do we have answer to is Pluto's center hot or cold. Some scientist beieve it is made of ieon nickel with alloys stuff. Will It put pluto's center to at least 100 C. I know it is unlikely to be 500 C or 1000 C. --Freeway19 02:30, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'd have to do some research to be sure, but my guess would be that Pluto's core is ice cold. How much heat it could have retained from the formation of the solar system is dependant on size and Pluto is tiny, so it likely has very little retained heat. The sun is obviously too weak at that distance to heat it up. There could be some heat from radioactivity, but that's about it (there won't be any tidal heating since it is tidally locked with its only large moon - I doubt Nix and Hydra are large enough or close enough to do much). Radioactivity could keep it warm, but I would guess not to above freezing. If I get a chance, I'll research it later. --Tango (talk) 10:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Sky
- I thouht Uranus is mostly coverwith haze, this is why the sky is blue all the time. Those gas giant's sky stay the same all the time, same as Neptune and Saturn. Saturn is much cover with haze too is thicker than Jupiter and neptune's.For uranus and neptune the sky color should be darker blue on top and get lighter on bottom. At the lowest layer must be light blue. Saturn is also much a blue planet I thouhgt, so it's sky much start out blue on haze, but at lower layer must vary to yellow, brown, and orange. Jupiter's have haze, but the disc is rainbow or opal-like color, so the sky on top is specualte to be blue, but not define. At the tropo level juptier may vary white, orange, brown. For Venus, the sky stay the same much all the time I thought. At the cloud levels, it appears to be yellow, but beenath the cloud could be orange mix, becasue of the terrible greenhouse effect, Venus' sky may look scarlet seen from surface. I am not certain what's the color above the top clouds of Venus, becasue it is on the bound to outer space, so I guess it's black.--Freeway8 20:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- I've post some links on Talk:Extraterrestrial skies. if you know what makes uranus and Neptune blue, and Saturn is actually dull-blue too.--Freeway8 22:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
[6]--Freeway8 22:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Atmospheric layers. Common snese of what makes uranus and neptune blue.--Freeway8 22:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- You seen atmosp lay diagram yet? They mainly at staro, the atmosp looks blue.--Freeway8 22:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- I thought the sky will not be black, the planet have to be total or almost airless to be black. Saturn and Uranus have thick layer of haze, at least will put the sky to bluish colour.--Freeway8 23:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Since the planet disc is blue, Blue, I believe is for upper layers only. But the lower layers the color vary for jupiter and Saturn. If it is above the clouds which is statos, the sky must be blue since it's the disc color However at main part, the sky could be something else. I don't know the sequence, but it must be something like white, brown, orange, yellow. Uranus and Neptune, the color vary possibly not as much as Jupiter and Saturn, the top layer is likely to be blue because the surrounding haze, the lower layer could be blue-white or perhaps green, I' m not certain.--Freeway8 23:21, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Just because it's blue from the outside doesn't mean it is blue from the inside. The colour from the outside will depend on where the atmosphere becomes opaque - if the upper layers are almost transparent then you're looking at the lower layers so it's their colour which significant, if the upper layers are opaque then their colour will be significant. However, opaqueness depends on wavelength (ie. colour), so it's all rather complicated. Unless you can find a reliable source specifically talking about the colour of the sky on those planets, I don't think you'll get anywhere. Trying to work it out based on the little scraps of information you've found so far is unlikely to work - if it does get the right answers, it's just luck. --Tango (talk) 23:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Is sky always on upper level or the sky is likely to be found on lower levels. Lowest level, I'm not certain. But near or above the cloud-tops it's likely to be blue becasue of haze. lower part, short answer-I don't know exactly. I guess yellow, white, brown, yellow-those would be good guess, but I won't include it on article. Do you tempt an AFD for Extraterrestrial skies article?--Freeway8 23:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- You keep saying that haze means the sky will be blue, where do you get that from? I haven't read Extraterrestrial skies fully, so I'm not sure how good it is, the topic is certainly worthy of an article though, so I see no reason to delete it. --Tango (talk) 23:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ruslik told me they should be blue akin to Earth, at least above or near the roof of the clouds. I'm not clear what's on the base of the cloud. It may lighten most likely at lower level. For Mars I thought the air is very thin, but some photos show Mars' sky is yellow-orange but what is most likely is the sky would be alot darker, possibly burnt orange, then above stato, Mars sky would appear black. For Venus, it's basically all cover with cloud, and terrible greenhouse effect. No source say exactly what color it is,but some book say Venus sky is yellow, poassibly just between the clouds. Because of thick atmosp, Venus sky would be burnt orange seen from surface.--Freeway8 23:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Mars' sky appears red due to dust in the atmosphere. Venus' sky will look whatever colour the clouds are, which I think is some kind of yellow or orange, since it's completely overcast. What colour it would be above the clouds, I don't know. The greenhouse effect doesn't have much to do with colour (the greenhouse effect is caused by visible light being able to get in but infrared light can't get out, that would cause the sky to be bright in the infrared but shouldn't affect its visible colour). --Tango (talk) 23:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- I beleive no matter what spacecraft see it's surface Mars' sky is like a garnet at it's tropospher. Mars' atmosp is very thin, so it's sky will get black sooner than Venus and Earth will I thought. For Venus above the cloud it's likely to be thermosph, so it's sky will appear black. Venus is not only total overcast but total misty, so if I was on it's surface I will just see yellow or orange smoke in my face.--Freeway8 00:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- There must still be a decent air pressure and density at cloud hight on Venus, otherwise it couldn't support the clouds. The sky is still blue on Earth when you're quite a long way above the cloud tops. I don't know how CO2 scatters light, so I'm not sure what colour it would be, but I doubt it would be completely black (it might still be misty, so still orange, I'm not sure). --Tango (talk) 11:23, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- I thouhgt Earth would be dark blue on the way above cloud tops. Not all part of Earth's sky is light blue I thouhgt. For Mars, you said the sky would be garnet colour I guarntee Martian sky would be sign darker than us, because of lower atmospheric pressure, above then clouds might be brown, then go a little higher then Mars sky would be completely black. For Gas giants, I doubt above the clouds, it's sky would be completely black, because above the clouds on gas giants they still have some light wave. Hydrogen and methan must give off blue lights so their sky must be blue at least above the cloud-tops. Below the clouds, they will have diff light waves, what's below the clouds-I don't know. For Titan the sky woulld be orange-brown perhaps dark orange, beause of acetylene and nitrogen hazes.--Freewayguy 22:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Do you have answer to those? Am I right saying these? Above the clouds over gas giants they might still have light waves, I thought it will not be completely black up but knowing the compounds it must be blue. Below the clouds they have differ light waves.--Freewayguy 00:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
|
|
The Reference Desk Barnstar | |
| Thank you for answering my IQ question on the Reference Desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 01:48, 17 October 2008 (UTC) |
You lately have told me to avoid spending time on internet, I wonder why you commenting this? I do in fact have a strong skills over solar ssytem, and know mor than anybody else in my school. I am also strong in my highway skills at my school, and I'm the ones who know the most about highways in Los Angeles-Orange COunty. i spend alot of time studying those stuff plus looking at maps, anyways why does this matter? Just curious?--Freewayguy 23:34, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- Knowing stuff is only part of the battle - you need to be able to explain it too. That means you need good language skills (among other things). You also need good language skills for life in general - you're seriously limiting the jobs you can get if you don't take the time now to learn better English. I strongly suggest you ask one of your English teachers for help, most teachers would be happy to help you if you are serious about improving. --Tango (talk) 23:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- I might still be able to have a descent life eventually I thought. I can probably be a mailman, they get 12 bucks/hour, is probably enough to let me live independently. my dad don't let me to waste those time on internet-this is why I'm not around on weekends. I thouhgt just as Caltrans, they want math skills only , for astrology-just strong science skills. I can still go to community college, at least will open building for me. You spend alot of time on internet too, do you go to a university now?--Freewayguy 23:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm at university studying mathematics, yes. Even for something like maths you still need good English skills - you need to be able to express yourself properly, you can't do it all in symbols. I'm doing a 100 page project this year, most of that will be words, not symbols - good language skills are essential for any kind of skilled work. Sure, you could deliver mail, but wouldn't you rather be doing something more interesting and better paying? You have a lot of intellectual curiosity, which is fantastic. That could take you a long way, but you'll need the language skills to get there. By the way, when you say astrology, do you mean astronomy? Astrology doesn't involve science at all. --Tango (talk) 00:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Do astronomy/astrology involves math skills or no? Is being a mailman good enough to let me live independently. My mo/dad gets mad if all they see me doing is obsessing/look at maps.--Freewayguy 00:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Astronomy involves lots of maths (but you still need to be able to write down research proposals, funding applications, papers detailing your findings, etc, all of that involves language skills). I don't know what astrology involves, it's all arbitrary nonsense anyway. Sure, a mailman will earn enough to put a roof over his head and food on the table, but that's about it. If you want to live comfortably and have and significant luxuries, you should aim higher. --Tango (talk) 00:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Will mailman be sufficent enough to buy a car so I can go from place to place via El Monte, Rosemead, San Gabriel Arcadia-those good-looking places in LA.--Freewayguy 01:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Buying a car is pretty cheap if you don't want anything special, running a car, however, is expensive and depends on the price of fuel. If fuel prices rise too much you might find it difficult to do non-essential driving on a low wage. Having just enough to get by isn't a good reason to not put the work in now to improve your language skills. Wouldn't you like to be able to write postcards from these nice places you'll be visiting without them being full of mistakes, for example? --Tango (talk) 09:56, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- it's tough to be a better writer. i do play constant focus on only highways and solar ssytem. my dad once yell at me when I have 4 copies of itens from mapquest, say my map is just junk to my mind. English is a tough language by struturs, my school principal wants me once to put away my maps and planets, and dig further in other subjects,and try to communicate with communities about something else besides just maps and planets.--Freewayguy 22:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, it can be tough, but it's important. Your teachers will be able to help (your school probably has a careers counsellor as well that could help you work out what kind of job you would like). While having interests that you spend a lot of time on can be a good thing you still have to spend enough time on other important things to make sure you have a broad education that will see you through life. You clearly want to help teach others about the things that interest you, that's why you're here, and with better language skills you could do that. Learning lots about maps and planets isn't much good if you can't do anything with that knowledge. --Tango (talk) 22:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
radh/jesus/mountain from molehill
i would normally do too, but this da vinci nonsense...--Radh (talk) 19:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
An Electronic Planet - Thanks
|
The E=mc² Barnstar | |
| For giving me far more than I could have imagined on the subject. Dmcq (talk) 22:44, 25 October 2008 (UTC) |
- You're most welcome! And thanks for the barnstar, it's not one I've seen before. --Tango (talk) 23:09, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Mars, Titan and Europa
From this image they said Europa could have a water ocean beneath it's thick ice, when the sun heats up and expand how you know it will not get an atmospheric. For Mars, Ruslik said becasue of frozen Carbon dioxide is trap beenath mars surface and the white polar caps is made of carbon dioxide, when it heats up the CO2 will liberate into surface, and Mars atmospheric is learnt to get greater, you said Mars' atmospheric will drain away, you seem to lose me a little bit, or Mars atmospheric may incrase possibly 30%, then soon enough Mars atmospheric will be gone quickly in less than half of billion years. Why you think Titan's atmospheric will elak away when sun becomes a giant star? The atmospheric level is 1.5 times greater than Earth and it is totally viel with orange smogs. If it have frozen gas beneath the surface then Titan will keep the atmospheric. I don't know if Europa and Titan have frozen gas beneath the surface. Ruslik said Titan will keep it's atmosperic, but I guess Titan's level then will be thinner than mars today.--Freewayguy 23:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Increased heat may cause increased outgassing which could contribute to an increased atmosphere on any of those worlds, but it wouldn't last long. The determining factors on how much atmosphere a world can keep hold of are gravity (high is good) and temperature (low is good). Their gravity isn't going to increase, so the increased temperature will make them lose their atmosphere faster. I'm not sure how long "not long" is, but it may well be fast enough to keep up with the outgassing so the atmosphere doesn't even increase temporarily - remember, the increase in temperature will happen fairly slowly over a couple of billion years, the outgassing will happen slowly over that time. There will be a much greater increase when the Sun goes red giant, but by that point the solar system only has a few million years to live and the Earth will already be uninhabitable. --Tango (talk) 23:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- I thought Earth will probably me swallow up by 5 billion years since the new science believe's sun's tidal bulge will slowly drain Earth's orbit. Would Earth even become uninhabitable sooner than one billion year, since Earth will become greenhouse or Venus like planet though I beielve Earth will slowly leak away the atmospheric as the sun heats up until slowly Earth's atmosp will even worn away even prior to the time Earth even takes chance to be swallow up. I think even if Earth and if Venus even still exist over sun's giant star, they will just become worlds of molten stones like they was 4.6 billion years ago, when the sun becomes white dwarf they will just become a cold, bleak plnet--Freewayguy 23:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Take a look at Sun#Life cycle, it explains that in just 1 billion years, the sun will have heated up enough to end life on Earth. --Tango (talk) 23:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Main Page redesign
The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, PretzelsTalk! 12:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Actually what they meant by low level light. So I'm orbiting aroudn Saturn I might still still the full disc, but wouldn't it be essentially dark like dark brown, but if I get closer then Saturn may be blue-opal color. Uranus and Neptune may rage color between purple and indigo combo with gray because of it's methane gas if I come a foot to the upper atmosp. All spacecrafts use black-and white photos, so will most planets be fake colors. Mercury, Venus, Mars and Jupiter is essentially closer and gets enough sunlight to been seen by humans orbiting around. For Jupiter it's 25 times dimmer than Earth so will it look a scale of gray color if I'm orbiting near it? Is Mercury and Venus close to white color if I'm orbiting arond it?--Freewayguy 22:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm really not an expert on this stuff, you would be better off asking on the ref desk. While Jupiter receives 25 times less sunlight than Earth per unit area, that doesn't necessarily mean it's 25 times dimmer. It's albedo (the amount it reflects) is pretty similar to Earth, but remember, it is much bigger. From the same distance, Jupiter's disk would be much larger than Earth's disk, which will increase the total amount of light reflected. In fact, it's radius is about 10 times that of Earth, so the area is about 100 times greater. That would suggest it will look 4 times *brighter* than Earth. The other gas giants will probably be dimmer, though, due to their smaller size and greater distance. --Tango (talk) 23:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- I thik you mena magnitude. All Mercury through Saturn have magnitude of less than 2. I wonder how numbers on magnitude works. higher number is darker, and lower number is lighter riht? Urnaus have a magnitude of 5, it's probably essentially dim but perhaps still bright enough to see theplanet from certain distance, perhaps I'll see a tinge of moderate purple color. Neptune have magnitude around 8, so if I'm orbiting around the planet I won't quite see the planet. plutoids havemagnitude of greater than 11, so it's surface will certainly look almost pitch black. The desk people may be wrong too. Most people count on the image they see photolize, the spacecraft takes those image black-and-white, and NASAS teams use some lgihts to fix the color, all iamge is essentially fake colors.--Freewayguy 00:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- See apparent magnitude. The numbers you are quoting are how bright they appear from Earth (the naked eye under good conditions can see down to about 5 or 6 [higher numbers are darker, as you say]), they will be brighter if you are closer to them. --Tango (talk) 00:05, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Mercury and Venus
My question is do Mercury ever hit past 900 F? I doubt Venus will get hotter than 950 F but Venus will at least be 800 F, those peaks may equal.--FRWY 00:38, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Science desks
Is the purpose of Science desk usually ask bout the source infomation? Desk is usually not a discussion forum? So sometimes people give me answers could be wrong? A user have earlier want me to try out on Beautforum, better place to get questions answer, and will the pople know mor than we do? Is Wiki not a school--FRWY 01:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- It varies depending on the question. Some questions have simple factual answers that people will just give and not worry about sources. Some questions people will go out and find sources for you. Other questions don't have a clear answer and we'll have a discussion about it and try to form an answer over a period of time. We don't guarantee our answers are correct, certainly. I know nothing about Beautforum, so I don't know if they'll give you better answers than we can. --Tango (talk) 02:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
RD advising for (im)patients
I appreciate your supportive feedback, Tango. My aim was to write an objective, sensible though clearly non-professional response while avoiding the anecdotal (which I don't mind providing on a User's talk page, within reason). The impetus, though, was empathy: wondering how I'd have felt over the past year-plus since my accident, had I been deprived of low- or no-cost access to orthopedists while I was recovering from fractured vertebrae among other injuries, not to mention the benefit of having five years' inhouse experience as ancillary staff in hospitals. Hence my request for the input (and hopefully consensus) of RD regulars. So thanks for yours! -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 18:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK v2.0
Hello! Thanks for showing an interest in Wikimedia UK v2.0. Formation of the company is currently underway under the official name "Wiki UK Limited", and we are hoping to start accepting membership in the near future. We have been drawing up a set of membership guidelines, determining what membership levels we'll have (we plan on starting off with just standard Membership, formerly known as Guarantor Membership, with supporting membership / friends scheme coming later), who can apply for membership (everyone), what information we'll collect on the application form, why applications may be rejected, and data retention. Your input on all of this would be appreciated. We're especially after the community's thoughts on what the membership fee should be. Please leave a message on the talk page with your thoughts.
Also, we're currently setting up a monthly newsletter to keep everyone informed about the to-be-Chapter's progress. If you would like to receive this newsletter, please put your username down on this page.
Thanks again. Mike Peel (talk) 19:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC) (Membership Secretary, Wikimedia UK [Proposed])
Thanks!
|
|
The Reference Desk Barnstar | |
| Thank you for contributing to my "greatest" poll on the Reference Desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 04:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)) |
Double exponential hyperinflation
Tango, since you expressed interest on the Zimbabwean Dollar talk page, I thought I'd link you to this interesting paper on the mechanism behind double-exponential price growth in hyperinflationary situations.
http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0112441v1
As it turns out plotting the CATO numbers I need to plot log(log(log(Z$))) in order to get the points to fall on a straight line, and even then it's a slight underfit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CecilPL (talk • contribs) 18:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Wiki UK Ltd Membership applications now invited!
Hello,
It gives me great pleasure to announce that Wiki UK Limited is now inviting membership applications! You can download the application form in PDF format from meta:Image:Wiki_UK_Ltd_membership_application_form.pdf
Information is given on the form about membership fees (£12/year standard, £6 for concessions); these need to be paid by cheque initially, although we hope to accept other forms of payment in the future. Applications should be submitted to me at the address given on the form. If you have any queries about the application process, please let me know.
We will formally start accepting members once we have a bank account, as we cannot process membership fees until that time. We will be submitting our application for a bank account in the very near future, and we hope to have this set up by the end of December at the latest.
Thank you for your support so far; I look forward to receiving your membership application.
Mike Peel (talk) 21:49, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Membership Secretary, Wiki UK Limited
P.S. if you haven't already, please subscribe to our newsletter! See meta:Wikimedia_UK_v2.0/Newsletter for more information and to subscribe.
Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Protection of Joseph Cao
Could you please explain your protection of Joseph Cao? There is a request to unprotect it here. There seems to have been little or no anonymous vandalism before the protection, and the article hasn't been protected before, so indefinite semi-protection seems unjustifiable. Thanks. --Tango (talk) 14:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I've unprotected it, but the edit before I protected it said in Vietnamese "as tall as a penis". YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Peer review for Locally connected space
Dear Tango,
There is currently a peer review for locally connected space. Could you please participate (if possible)?
Thanks for your help.
Topology Expert (talk) 11:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Summary: Wikimedians in the United Kingdom are working to set up a chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation, which will aid and encourage people to collect, develop and effectively disseminate knowledge. A board of five members has been elected, and a company has now been set up. Membership applications are now invited, and will be processed as soon as we have a bank account. The organisation needs the support and involvement of people like you.
In this month's newsletter:
Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:57, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Summary: You can now join Wiki UK Ltd, which hopes to become the official UK chapter of Wikimedia in January. The organisation is planning its first Annual General Meeting, where members can vote on who is on the board, and put forward and vote on resolutions. The organisation is already supporting activities such as a bid to hold Wikimania 2010 in Oxford and the exciting Wikipedia Loves Art project at the Victoria and Albert Museum. We also bring you news of the the recent Wikimeet in London.
In this month's newsletter:
Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Newsletter delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 16:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Meetup
You may be interested: Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester 4. Thanks, Majorly talk 18:51, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
Dear Tango,
Wishing you a happy new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.
Kind regards,
Majorly talk 21:18, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
| WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
new WP:RDREG userbox
| This user is a Reference desk regular. |
The box to the right is the newly created userbox for all RefDesk regulars. Since you are an RD regular, you are receiving this notice to remind you to put this box on your userpage! (but when you do, don't include the |no. Just say {{WP:RD regulars/box}} ) This adds you to Category:RD regulars, which is a must. So please, add it. Don't worry, no more spam after this - just check WP:RDREG for updates, news, etc. flaminglawyerc 07:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 20:38, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
The straw poll
Check here. Both of my test moves to my sandbox were marked as minor. I had no control over that. Jonathan321 (talk) 21:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm... interesting. They seem to be marked as minor on diff and history pages, but not watchlists. Seems like a bug to me, I'll report it. --Tango (talk) 21:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Is at the discussion stage. Go on, you know you want to. Sticky Parkin 03:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Re: Ref desk, your answer
I did NOT intend to revert you. I asked a legit question, along with that Lomn asked, only someone called it "Soapboxing". Can you reinstate your answer? Powerzilla (talk) 03:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- I got very confused by that - I happened to edit conflict with you while answering another question and ended up with a really weird diff! I think it's all fixed now (I'll leave you and Algebraist to fight over whether it's a legit question or not). --Tango (talk) 03:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- We were discussing the article Carjacking and this Louisiana law. That law allows people there to kill carjackers, even IF they think some idiot will carjack them. See also the Ref desk Talk page as well, for another source. Powerzilla (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 01:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I actually LOL'ed
With this edit, you nearly made milk squirt out of my nose. At least, you would have, had I been drinking milk. For that accomplishment, you deserve a barnstar. Cheers! – ClockworkSoul 00:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 4 | 24 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Delivered at 05:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)
ambient light?
What does ambient usually mean? If Uranus and Neptune's ambient light is blue-green, so I won't notice cyan? Then what color would the atmosphere look to me if I won't notice the blue-green? Would orange look black?--69.226.46.118 (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Ambient light is the light that's all around you, rather than coming directly from a particular source. If you hold up a white piece of paper, it will appear whatever colour the ambient light is (although you'll still perceive it as white, as we've discussed). I'm not really sure what the light is like on Uranus or Neptune, it will depend on how deep you are in the atmosphere, for a start. Unless the ambient light contains no (or almost no) light the same colour as a given object, it won't appear black. An orange object would look orange, the eye (or rather, the brain) adjusts for the difference in the colour of the ambient light. I guess an orange light, on the other hand, would appear a little different since the eye would adjust unnecessarily (since it makes its own light, its appearance doesn't depend on the ambient light), the eye would remove a little blue and green, so I guess it would look redder than it should. --Tango (talk) 23:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
it won't appear black You meant it will or won't appear black for the 6th line you post.--69.226.46.118 (talk) 00:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- It won't. It will only appear black if there is absolutely no light of the appropriate colour for it to reflect. I would expect the ambient light on Uranus or Neptune to contain pretty much all frequencies of visible light, just in different proportions. --Tango (talk) 13:37, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Summary: We lead with the exciting news that we are now recognised as Wikimedia UK by the Wikimedia Foundation. This means that we can shortly open a bank account and approve membership applications. Planning is also underway for a new website and for the upcoming Annual General Meeting. Meanwhile, we continue to support Wikipedia Loves Art, which will launch on 1st February and the bid to hold Wikimania 2010 in Oxford, and bring news of recent and upcoming meet-ups.
In this month's newsletter:
- WMF approval and chapter formation process
- New website
- Annual General Meeting
- Wikipedia Loves Art
- Oxford Wikimania bid
- Meet-ups
Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 19:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Uranus and Neptune
What you meant by I would expect the ambient light on Uranus or Neptune to contain pretty much all frequencies of visible light, just in different proportions? Did you meant they are ambient to orange, blue, and green color? They extract orange light and absorbes cyan light? So did you meant I will be so used to seeing cyan/orange light I won't notice it. What aobut Saturn's ambient color? The problem is Saturn is too faraway from sun, it only get 1/100 amount of sunlight than that of Earth.--69.226.46.118 (talk) 22:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- The light coming from the Sun is a mixture of different frequencies (ie. colours). The planet's atmosphere is unlikely to absorb all the light of a given frequency, just some of it for certain colours. That will change the proportions of different colours, so will make certain objects look a different colour that they usually would (although you wouldn't notice), but it won't make any of them look black unless they were black to start with (it may make them a little darker, though). --Tango (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- So will Mars look white to me if I'm orbiting around it, since the ambient light is vermilion, when the vermilion color washes away would the surface appear white when I'm landing on it?--69.226.46.118 (talk) 23:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- If you are in orbit there isn't really any ambient light. Only objects directly facing the Sun will be illuminated. They, however, will be illuminated with white light, pretty much by definition (our eyes perceive white as being the neutral colour because that's the sun emits). Once you are within the atmosphere, the ambient light will be reddish, but the ground will look whatever colour the ground is (probably grey, maybe slightly reddish brown, the ice caps would be white). The eye compensates for the coloured light so you see what you would see if it were illuminated with white light. --Tango (talk) 00:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- Then what would be the colour of Moon if I orbit around it. WOuld it look gray, since the ambient light on it's surface is black-and-white or monochramic. But astronauts landing on the surface during the day makes the surface looks brown. The dark side would look profoundly black, since Moon have no atmosphere.--69.226.46.118 (talk) 05:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, humans have been on the moon. When Appolo 11 took pictures, moon looked silver to dark gray. In space, do people use color camera, or black-and-white. Earth looks blue, like normal when humans orbit around it. I thought it is always a very tricky thing to define the absolute truth color, seeing from space. Venus is ambient to yellow, so if I fly around Venus myself, would it look almost white, or odd shades of blue? Venus is 30% clsoer to sun than Earth, so the light is around 4 times brighter than sunniest day on Earth, or maybe the color vision on Venus will just burn off right?--69.226.46.118 (talk) 01:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- As far as I know, the Moon is dark grey and Venus is kind of yellow, so that's what you would see from orbit. It is difficult to define "true colour" when talking about space for the exact reasons we're talking about, but I think photos taken of the entire disc of a planet from space are pretty accurate colour (unless they are intentionally false colour, of course). It really would be easier if you asked these questions on the ref desk, then other people could answer. --Tango (talk) 22:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Would we not notice yellow when we actally orbit around Venus. The thing is our own eyes get so used to seeing yellow, we just won't notice yellow. Rather than would Venus' surface actually look gray or pale orangeish?--69.226.46.118 (talk) 23:26, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- What if I'm orbiting around Uranus and Neptune looking out the window?Will it even look cyan/blue to me? What about Pluto? Since it is too faraway from sun would it's disc even look black to me if I'm orbitng around it?--69.229.108.39 (talk) 00:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Would I be surronded by yellow if i'm orbiting around Saturn? Saturn is 100 times dimmer than earth, disc would look close to black looking out the window? Or Saturn will look bluer than it should?--69.229.108.39 (talk) 02:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Tango, What you say about sunlight 100 times dimmer than Earth? A thunder strike your house at midnight. When we light a candle at 20-30 feet away. That's hardly enough to cast light. So When we look down at Saturn, it will look essentially dark, mostly almost black. What color is Saturn ambient to? Is it tawny or yellowish brown smog surrounding us? Once we get used to yellowish brown we just won't notice it. The sky color does not affect what color the disk will look like it space. I know Saturn's sky is not black until we get deep into the interior levels.--69.229.108.39 (talk) 23:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- The problem with telling the truth color in space is our crummy eye color vision. Mercury is 10 times brighter than sunniest day on Earth, this is what SteveBaker said so the color on Mercury will just be excessively bright too see color (brighter than electric white), with our own eyes, even with our strong sunglasses, I thought. So If I'm trying to land on Mercury would mercury look no color but irritating white light?--69.229.108.39 (talk) 02:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 5 | 31 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 22:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Rational series
To list the rational numbers as q1,q2,... such that sum( (qi - q(i+1))^2 ) is finite is not too hard, but it helps to tackle some easier problems first. Try to find a surjection q from the positive integers to the rational numbers between 0 and 1 such that sum( (qi - q(i+1))^2 ) is finite. In other words, only handle a/n for 0 ≤ a ≤ n, and feel free to repeat numbers more than once. Handling all rationals exactly once is not much different. Careful of saying too much on the ref desk, as the guy really is just pasting in his homework assignment, 3 out of 14 problems so far. JackSchmidt (talk) 20:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tips. I'll take your world that it's possible... I don't really do analysis (I'm more into algebraic number theory). I could probably get there given time, but I'd rather go and find some food! --Tango (talk) 20:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Based on your comments there, I have been reverting this guy's posts to your talk page. Please tell me if you don't want me to do so. Algebraist 00:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- That's fine. I actually edit conflicted with you as I told him to go somewhere else, but just removing it works to (I did say "without comment", after all!). --Tango (talk) 10:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Fascism on the Ref desk/Humanities
I read your comment about well-formed sentences, and quickly started to re-read what I had written in the immediately preceding response. I was down two lines before I realized that you were not likely addressing your comment to me. It is really easy to get sidetracked into the personal here. I am beginning to understand why everyone seems to have such a thin skin. Anyway, no problem here, of course. I thought you might find my initial reaction funny. (I had also been annoyed about the OP's style: I kept reading "cud" to rhyme with "mud" and would then have to backtrack for meaning.) ៛ Bielle (talk) 18:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Did I mis-indent? If so, sorry for the confusion! Even if I didn't, it's very easy to get confused about who is talking to who in those kind of threads - I've certainly done it! --Tango (talk) 18:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Wiki-etiquette
You just conflicted me vcould you not see an inuse? Giano (talk) 15:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Inuse doesn't mean other people can't edit it. That self-reference was completely inappropriate, and I've removed it again. --Tango (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
It will be in a moment needed - it is why there is an inuse - it means observe some ettiquette. Giano (talk) 15:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- If you are going to discuss his Wikipedia article in the article, then do so. Putting the date it was created in the lede with no explanation is inappropriate. Just because you are still writing the article doesn't mean people can't read it. This article is because discussed in the media, it is important that it follows basic policy (such as notability and undue weight) from the start. --Tango (talk) 15:48, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I am welll aware of policy, if you know so uch why not write it yourself, instead of hindering those that are? And what's more I doubt even my fame is so great that my writing is discussed in the media within seconds of me creating it. Giano (talk) 15:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Which is why I am attempting to set the record straight, this story broke last night, I waited for others better qualified, like yourself to write it, they did not. So don't keep complaining. Giano (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
No personal attacks
This is a serious personal attack; putting or restoring the name of the original creator of an article into a biography in order to draw attention to him because you disagree with the creation is beyond the pale. You have been blocked for 24h. — Coren (talk) 21:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Since most people can't see the diff, Tango included, it would be helpful to give context into the background of this punitive block. Majorly talk 21:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I had, indeed, not considered that the diff would no be accessible. I am referring to the inclusion of the username "Giano II" with wikilink in the text of the article Giles Hattersley (a biography of a living person) as its author with an emphasis on the matter during a dispute about the propriety of the article. — Coren (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Simply put, it is an attack because it is inappropriate contents whose inclusion was likely (if not certain) to offend an editor and escalate a dispute. — Coren (talk) 22:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I saw the edit, and do not believe it to be a "serious personal attack", certainly not one to block someone over, 3 hours after it happened. Majorly talk 22:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Majorly, you know very well that we do not credit authors in the text of an article; this mention of Giano was strictly for the purpose of painting him in a bad light as a malefactor. Regardless of how appropriate (or not) the original article creation might have been, both editors knew — or should have known — that this unacceptable addition (and reinsertion) of the name in the next of a BLP could only serve to offend and anger its target. — Coren (talk) 22:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm still wondering what purpose this block is serving, Coren. The incident took place nearly three hours ago; Giano II has been blocked and unblocked; Jimbo has deleted the article. Is this block serving any kind of purpose? If so, I'd like to know what it is. Otherwise, please undo the block. With regards to the other user you blocked, I have no opinion, as it was he who apparently included the information originally. Tango merely restored it. Majorly talk 22:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I don't understand this block, either. True, the edit was ill-advised and violated several style norms and so forth, but an attack? That's hardly credible. I'd support an unblock. Sandstein 22:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- (2x e/c_ Based on Tango's edit summary, and Conti's edit summary, I don't think Tango was trying to attack Giano. He was merely saying that Wikipedia's logs are a reliable source. He even said that he was not making a judgement on the content of the edit. I would also support an unblock. J.delanoygabsadds 22:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm still wondering what purpose this block is serving, Coren. The incident took place nearly three hours ago; Giano II has been blocked and unblocked; Jimbo has deleted the article. Is this block serving any kind of purpose? If so, I'd like to know what it is. Otherwise, please undo the block. With regards to the other user you blocked, I have no opinion, as it was he who apparently included the information originally. Tango merely restored it. Majorly talk 22:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Majorly, you know very well that we do not credit authors in the text of an article; this mention of Giano was strictly for the purpose of painting him in a bad light as a malefactor. Regardless of how appropriate (or not) the original article creation might have been, both editors knew — or should have known — that this unacceptable addition (and reinsertion) of the name in the next of a BLP could only serve to offend and anger its target. — Coren (talk) 22:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I saw the edit, and do not believe it to be a "serious personal attack", certainly not one to block someone over, 3 hours after it happened. Majorly talk 22:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
(undent) It would seem that, while the actual text being reverted was very much inappropriate, the reversion itself was done in good faith on other grounds. I've unblocked stating so; sorry for the short block. — Coren (talk) 22:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the unblock. A lot of this seems to be drama for drama's sake. There are a lot of allegations and admin actions being thrown around that are really not serving any purpose. A journalist has written a negative article about Wikipedia and we've resorted in infighting and childish bickering - what does that say about us? Let's all stay calm and handle this like the rational people I know we all are. --Tango (talk) 22:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- It would appear you've been stuck in the middle of a very ugly mess. The newspaper article was a nasty enough event without that article being written in response; and because of the level of tempers and some of the involved personalities, we were all more on edge than we should have. — Coren (talk) 22:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Cheers! --Tango (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Things certainly went down differently over here than for me. I only wish I had known of this discussion at the time. MickMacNee (talk) 01:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- I would have told you but, well, I was blocked! While I don't think there is any evidence that you added the content in bad faith (so the block was uncalled for), there is a difference between adding content and reverting a badly justified removal of content. I had a rather easier case to argue. --Tango (talk) 13:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 6 | 8 February 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
S. O.
Your comment on the refdesk got a big laugh here. --Milkbreath (talk) 21:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- All I did was answer the question - the comment about squid was someone else (unsigned). --Tango (talk) 21:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oh. Never mind. --Milkbreath (talk) 21:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:
- Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
- An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
- News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
- Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
- Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks and a request
Thanks for signing up at Wikipedia:Peer review/volunteers and for your work doing reviews. It is now just over a year since the last peer review was archived with no repsonse after 14 (or more) days, something we all can be proud of. There is a new Peer review user box to track the backlog (peer reviews at least 4 days old with no substantial response), which can be found here. To include it on your user or talk page, please add {{Wikipedia:Peer review/PRbox}} . Thanks again, and keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Message from MACherian
from:'MACherian' {||||} [email address removed to prevent spam] Would you be kind enough to review my submission 'On Gödel's Conjecture', on my user talk page, which for convenience is appended below. [I am new to the use of Wikipedia]. Thank you MACherian
On Gödel’s Conjecture Abstract: ‘Not (proved or disproved)’ does not exhaust all reference to ‘proved’, or ‘disproved’.
Gödel presents his Incompleteness Theorems as proof that in natural numbers, inductively (recursively) generated as a ‘denumerably infinite’ set large enough for his numbering procedure, there is no consistent and complete formalization of elementary arithmetic. His proof is conditional on the axioms of Principia Mathematica [PM], with the added axiom of infinity (in the form he wants it, viz. ‘there are exactly denumerably many individuals’), the axiom of choice, and Zermelo-Fraenkel-von Neumann axioms of set theory appended to the Peano Postulates. [Collected Works Vol.1, OUP 1986 p.124]. He says, "…all methods of proof used in mathematics today have been formalized in them, i.e. reduced to a few axioms and rules of inference. It may therefore be conjectured (Vermutung) that these axioms and rules of inference are also sufficient to decide all mathematical questions which can in any way at all be expressed formally in the systems concerned", (p.145). For his conjecture to hold he also needs to have shown that only valid formulae follow from the rule-following inferences he relies on of PM.
If ‘p’is taken as true, and ‘-p’ false, the logical and the formalist equivalence and truth of: |p| < = > |(- -p)| < = > |(p or -p)| < = >|-(p and -p)|, viz. the laws of double negation, excluded middle and non-contradiction follow. Any one statement taken as true implies implies the truth of any and all the others. Based on the same axioms and rules of inference, on which Gödel [p.145] claims that in a formally deductive system, an arithmetical statement cannot be 'proved or disproved', i.e. -(p or -p), and hence is undecidable from within that system; he could have added that it is also not |-(p and -p)| i.e. ‘proved and disproved'; and ‘-p’, i.e. ‘disproved’. ‘Not (proved or disproved)’ does not exhaust all reference to ‘proved’, or ‘disproved’.
The law of Double Negation is |-|-p| < = > |p|. There are only two ways about it, either p or else -p, viz. the law of the excluded middle |p or -p|. |-|-p| is another way of writing |p|, and |p or –p|. Against Gödel, it is only necessary to show that the law of excluded middle |p or -p| entails that of non-contradiction |-(p and –p)|. When only |p or -p| is true, |p and -p| is false, |-|p and -p| is true viz. the law of non-contradiction. Equivalent steps of deduction are used in PM. The equivalence of |p or -p| and |-|p and -p|, also follows by De Morgan’s Rules (included in the PM) starting from either side. MACherian (talk · contribs)
- I'm afraid formal logic is among my weakest areas, so I'm probably not the best person to review this. Try Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Mathematics. Good luck and happy editing! --Tango (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
|
|
The Reference Desk Barnstar
Thanks for answering my Guitar Hero Karaoke question on the Reference Desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 06:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
- Books extension enabled
- News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
- Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Summary: The chapter is now up and running, and we have now opened our bank account. We have a new website, and are putting plans in place for the first Annual General Meeting. Meanwhile, February has seen the successful Wikipedia Loves Art at the Victoria and Albert Museum, bidding to host Wikimania 2010 has opened, and the Government's Intellectual Property consultation has closed. We also bring the regular news of meet-ups, and a new feature highlighting press coverage of Wikimedia in the UK.
In this month's newsletter:
- Chapter formation process
- Website
- Annual General Meeting
- Wikipedia Loves Art
- Oxford Wikimania bid
- IP consultation
- Meet-ups
- News coverage
Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 20:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Med advice on the Ref Desk
Hi Tango -
For your reference, there's a standard protocol at the Reference Desks for responding to questions which have been identifed as potential requests for medical advice; see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines/Medical advice.
If you think that a question doesn't meet the definition of a medical advice request outlined by that document, you can participate in the discussion on the Ref Desk talk page (Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Removed request for medical advice); a thread can always be started there when a question is removed. Please don't just revert the editor who removed the request; that leads to the edit wars that in turn led to the creation of the medical advice guidelines in the first place.
If a consensus evolves that the question wasn't a request for medical advice, it will be restored to the bottom of the appropriate Desk page at that time, and it will receive the care and loving attention of all the Desk's denizens. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey!
Thanks for answering my "Jane" question on the reference desk. Hopefully, your advice will help "Joe". Visit my page sometime! <(^_^)> Pokegeek42 (talk) 00:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Meetup
A reminder that the Manchester meetup is this Saturday. Hope to see you there! Majorly talk 18:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
My redundant answer on the refdesk
Hi, sorry I seemed to imply that you didn't mention the irradiance/radiance distinction in Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Pain_in_the...eye. My answer was sort-of directed at User:Edison, who seemed to want the distinction highlighted more prominently. I have modified my answer to remove the "missing from this discussion" bit. Someone42 (talk) 05:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
- News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
- Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009
— 16 March 2009
- News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:05, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey there. I notice you were interested in Manchester 4; we're in the process of organising another one for some time in April. Hope you'll attend :). Ironholds (talk) 23:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Summary: With everything in place for the chapter, other than charity status, we have organised the first Annual General Meeting - your chance to influence the chapter's future and stand for the board. The bid to hold Wikimania 2010 in Oxford is coming on nicely. We also bring you the usual details of meet-ups and news coverage, and details of how to propose a project, and possibly get funding.
In this month's newsletter:
- Chapter formation process
- Annual General Meeting and Board elections
- Oxford Wikimania bid
- Project funding
- Meet-ups
- News coverage
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Newsletter delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 18:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
: 23 March 2009
- From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
- Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
- News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
: 30 March 2009
- From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
- Special report: Community weighs license update
- News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
: 6 April 2009
- Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
- News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
- WikiProject report: WikiProject China
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
: 13 April 2009
- License update: Licensing vote begins
- News and notes: WMF petitions Obama, longer AFDs, UK meeting, and more
- Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Color
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Happy Tango's Day!
 |
Tango has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Cheers, If you'd like to show off your awesomeness, you can use this userbox. |
Peer review of Euclidean algorithm?
Hi Tango,
I'm tempted to bring Euclidean algorithm to FAC and trust my luck there, but I hope I'm wise enough to ask for a peer review first. (There's probably a good reason why so few mathematical articles are Featured!) The EA article received a detailed review from Jakob.scholbach a few weeks ago; but I'm loath to trouble him again. On the volunteer list, I noticed that you review articles in pure mathematics; would you be willing to review this one? Thank you, Proteins (talk) 17:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't have time for a detailed review, but I'll give it a quick look. --Tango (talk) 18:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the review; I'll try to take your advice. Good luck with your dissertation! Proteins (talk) 11:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
: 27 April 2009
- Book reviews: Reviews of Lazy Virtues: Teaching Writing in the Age of Wikipedia
- News and notes: Usability study, Wiki Loves Art, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia Art dispute, and brief headlines
- WikiProject report: Interview on WikiProject Final Fantasy
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Probability
- Your terminology was fine, I don't know what Michael is complaining about. Perhaps he missed the fact that (x-1)/x=1-1/x, which makes it clear that one is the complement of the other? --Tango (talk) 11:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
You're mistaken, Tango. If the sum of the two probabilities is 1, that does not mean the events are complements of each other. The probability of getting a "1" when rolling a die is 1/6. The probability of getting a number no more than 5 is 5/6. The sum of those two is 1. But they are not complements. And the poster used the word "event" where he probably meant "trial". Where I used the word "event" above, speaking of whether two events are complementary, I used the word "event" correctly. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- True, I made the implicit assumption that the outcomes were mutually exclusive. I should have been explicit about that, but I think it is clear that that is what the OP intended. Yes, the OP's terminology wasn't entirely standard, but it was pretty easy to understand what they were asking. As long as language is understandable, it is essentially correct, since that is its purpose. --Tango (talk) 06:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- And that's the problem: It was not clear what he was saying; I had to guess. Michael Hardy (talk) 14:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- Either that, or I made the implicit assumption that the list of outcomes was exhaustive. Either is a reasonable interpretation of the question and each implies the other. --Tango (talk) 06:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Summary: Wikimedia UK has held it's first AGM! The AGM included numerous speakers talking about a wide range of topics, ranging from collaboration with the BBC to reaching out around the world with Wikipedia on a DVD! A number of official actions were also taken - including the passing of six Resolutions, the election of the new seven-person Board, and the first new Board meeting! Also this month, an overview of the Chapters meeting in Berlin, of which two of our number were present, and details of the upcoming meetups this month!
In this month's newsletter:
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skenmy (talk • contribs) 19:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Edited your reply on Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#What_is_the_Weight_of_the_Earth_in_Pounds.3F
Just a courtesy note - I corrected your reply to stop the rest of the page being rendered incorrectly - you used <sup>2<sup> instead of <sup>2</sup> . Exxolon (talk) 21:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Medical questions, teeth and the refdesk
Re Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#teeth. Tango, let's keep the meta-discussion off the refdesk, and move it to the talk page (for the N+1'st time) if necessary, or to Steve's talk page as I did. --NorwegianBlue talk 20:47, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Addendum: Your answer was somewhat bitey towards the OP. Here's the OP's post, after minor editing by me:
- I have a very weak teeth. I have visited many dentists, but they weren't a lot of help. Now, after so many advances in other fields, I find it weird that no-one has found a preventive treatment for dental cavities. I think it should be pretty simple. Some kind of mouth wash that will produce a thin film on the surface of the tooth, so it won't be in contact with food left, so no cavity will form. Really, I don't think it should be that hard. We've built space ships, rockets, submarines, airplanes - I think it should be a pretty easy task. I say this, because I visit the dentist so often, and it's frightening every time.
- Neither the OP nor I are native speakers of English, so the English in my edited version might not be perfect, but the meaning is pretty clear to me. The contentious issue is of course whether the OP is asking for medical advice. Per Kainaw's criterion, the user is clearly not asking for a diagnosis or a prognosis. However, there may be an implicit question about treatment advice in there. I tried to answer whether caries can be prevented by applying substances to the tooth surface, and edited my post to make it clear that I was speaking in general terms, and not attempting to address the needs of the OP. The problem, of course, is that the OP is giving a lot of personal health information, along with a question that can be answered objectively. --NorwegianBlue talk 22:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- I would never criticise someone for poor English that is due to not being a native speaker. I criticised the OP because it was clear they hadn't made the effort to write correctly. I've spent more time than I care to admit online interacting with people with varying levels of English ability and I can easily tell what is bad English skills, what is bad general language skills and what is laziness. In this case, it was clearly laziness. I consider it disrespectful to ask people for help and not make the effort to make your question easy to understand. All they needed to do was proof read it. It doesn't require any additional skill or ability, just a couple of minutes of extra time. As for the question itself, it is not an implicit request for treatment advice, it is an explicit one. I can't see any way that question can be interpreted as anything other than a request for medical advice. Of course you can answer objectively, you always can, but we have to avoid doing that because you can't be sure that your objective response applies to the OP and the OP will most likely interpret it as advice intended for them. --Tango (talk) 00:25, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
When discrimination is unacceptable
Dear Tango, I hope we're on the same page here, or am I hopelessly "prejudiced" when certain topics crop up (with discouraging frequency) on the RDs? Not that the OP's query was trollish in any way, but I'm wondering at the variance between your response and mine. Since you're such a stalwart and have helped so much in the past, I'm just asking for a tune-up here. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 20:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see anything wrong with your reply. I interpreted the question from a moral point of view and decided that the ref desk isn't the place to make moral judgements, you interpreted from a legal point of view and discussed that. I think our responses complement each other quite well. I don't see anything about your response that is prejudiced for or against any group. In fact, I'm not entirely sure what you're asking me - I fail to any problem for me to help with! --Tango (talk) 22:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
: 11 May 2009
- News and notes: Wikimania 2010, usability project, link rot, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Quote hoax replicated in traditional media, and more
- Dispatches: WikiProject Birds reaches an FA milestone
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Michael Jackson
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
: 18 May 2009
- From the editor: Writers needed
- Special report: WikiChemists and Chemical Abstracts announce collaboration
- Special report: Embassies sponsor article-writing contests in three languages
- News and notes: Wiki Loves Arts winners, Wikimania Conference Japan, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Arbitrator blogs, French government edits, brief headlines
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Opera
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Summary: Whilst our application to HMRC has not yet been successful, we're after your views on the proposed New Chapters' Agreement, your suggestions for a Wikimedia UK conference next year and your ideas for initiatives to start! We also bring you updates on Wikipedia Loves Art, Other Chapters' Activities, Meet-ups and Press coverage.
In this month's newsletter:
- HMRC Application Status
- New Chapters' Agreement
- Wikimania 2010 (and beyond!)
- Initiatives
- Wikipedia Loves Art
- Other Chapters' Activities
- Meet-ups
- Press coverage
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
a question
hi a question regarding your article on math. if you can supply definitons before the proof it isgood, because otherwise its is really hard to understand by what definitions you go by. thank u
- You're right, it is always good to be explicit about definitions and conventions. Is there a specific article that you think is unclear? --Tango (talk) 21:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Low Salt
Hi Tango: I didn't want to put this on the Ref Desk as it will likely lead off on a tangent where people start defending their homelands. I have lived in the States in the past, though not for over 30 years now. Yes, its mid- and low-level restaurant food tends to be salty, though its best ones rank right up there with world standards. I have eaten in a lot of countries, and even though I love the island of Puerto Rico, its food is almost inedible because of the amount of salt. Even its best restaurants use salt like a separate ingredient, and not like a condiment. I had to order meals that used no pre-made sauces or stocks, which is harder than you might think when even the water the rice is boiled in is salt laden, and hint that any salt would send me into immediate anaphalactic shock, before I could get edible food in the restaurants of San Juan. // BL \\ (talk) 16:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- It's the amount of salt they put on their chips I really can't get - there is salt on the table, why put any on the chips before you serve them? Give your customers the choice, there is nothing to lose... --Tango (talk) 17:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
: 25 May 2009
- License update: Licensing vote results announced, resolution passed
- News and notes: New board member, flagged revisions, Eurovision interviews
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia: threat or menace?
- WikiProject report: WikiProject LGBT studies
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Hot Damn your fast
How do you get Ref Desk answers so fast? What do you do for your day job? I'm a new editor and the Ref Desk seems a good place for me to edit, but you always seem to beat me to it (I don't mind, by the way). You're seriously good at it, and I thought you should know. Prokhorovka (talk) 20:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you, that's great to hear! At the moment, I don't have a day job - I'm a student that has just finished his exams, so I have nothing to do but sit in front of my computer hitting refresh! Don't worry about answering a question that has already been answered - often a second answer can add something to the first, or add more references, or suggest more further reading (either Wikipedia articles or other sources). Good luck! --Tango (talk) 20:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
: 1 June 2009
- From the editor: Browsing the archives
- Book review: Review of The Future of the Internet
- Scientology: End of Scientology arbitration brings blocks, media coverage
- News and notes: Picture of the Year, Wikipedia's first logo, Board elections, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Tamil Wikipedia, Internet Watch Foundation, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 23:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Can you clarify this?
Hi Tango, can you explain, in ref to this, what exactly is meaningless? The OP asked about instances where twins are born at a "vastly different time or even date" and gave as an example where the second twin is "born 2 days later". I spent a half hour doing research to find sources discussing exactly that.
You then dismiss my report of those studies as being "meaningless statistics" because "the sample has clearly been chosen to be made up of cases with a large delay" - but the OP was specifically asking about cases with a large delay, isn't the whole point of the RefDesk to answer the actual question that was asked? And I even went on to describe the rarity of these cases and found more statistics on the overall situation with multiple deliveries. What more would be needed to meet your standards?
Also, median is always a meaningful statistic - it means the point at which half the samples are above, and half below, the quoted number. It's valid regardless of sample size. But maybe you can further explain - in your own experience of submitting work to peer-reviewed journals, don't the expert reviewers tell you about the meaningless statistics before the work gets published? Franamax (talk) 09:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- The median of the sample is meaningful when you use it to help you interpret the rest of the data, that's why it was in the paper. It's not meaningful on its own. Imagine there was a question about how many tall people there are in the world and I found a paper about tall people and quoted the statistic that the minimum height in the sample was 6ft. That wouldn't be helpful at all, it would just mean that the people doing the study chose "over 6ft" to be their definition of "tall". The median of a sample only tells you something about the population if the sample was chosen to be representative. If the sample was chosen to specifically be from a particularly subset of the population, as in this case, it only tells you about the selection method, not the population. --Tango (talk) 11:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Maths of Science?
[7] SpinningSpark 15:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Not really, I just thought it was amusing. SpinningSpark 16:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Nah doesn't make any difference! Also, Science v. Everything else just about comes home for Science but Mathematics v. Everything else? And one more thing, before you click on the next link, would you care to have a guess at who comes out on top in Guessing v. Mathematics? SpinningSpark 19:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- They don't combine like that - that's all sites which use all three words (at least, I assume it is, it's lower than any of them individually). I would guess that "guessing" would beat "mathematics", it is an every day word. And I would be wrong, well who would have thought it! --Tango (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh right, I should have used OR in the search string. Science still wins. SpinningSpark 19:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- "Science" includes so many things, though, try this one. --Tango (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, compare like with like ranks. Physics with calculus, or biology with algebra or similar. SpinningSpark 20:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- "Science" includes so many things, though, try this one. --Tango (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh right, I should have used OR in the search string. Science still wins. SpinningSpark 19:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- They don't combine like that - that's all sites which use all three words (at least, I assume it is, it's lower than any of them individually). I would guess that "guessing" would beat "mathematics", it is an every day word. And I would be wrong, well who would have thought it! --Tango (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Nah doesn't make any difference! Also, Science v. Everything else just about comes home for Science but Mathematics v. Everything else? And one more thing, before you click on the next link, would you care to have a guess at who comes out on top in Guessing v. Mathematics? SpinningSpark 19:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I still totally don't get what is number like Pluto-Neptune 3:2 or whatever. Formation and evolution of the solar system#Long term stablity said Pluto's oribt will be unknown in 10-20 million years from now. They also said Europa, Io is tidally lock from Jupiter. is Titan tidally lock from Saturn? Does that mean Europa is moving further away from Jupiter? Is Titan moving away from Saturn?--69.226.38.106 (talk) 00:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- Why are you asking me? Please ask questions on the reference desk so everyone can answer. I'm not sure about the various tidally locked moons, I'd have to look them up, but when people say Pluto and Neptune are in a 3:2 resonance they mean that Pluto orbits around the sun twice in exactly the time Neptune orbits around the sun three times. That is, a year of Pluto is 1.5 times the length of a year on Neptune. --Tango (talk) 00:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- It is because I post it on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#Long term stability nobody answer it, I post on bottom of section on June 10. Do I have to start a new section of question on diff day, or I should post similar questions on older section?--69.226.38.106 (talk) 00:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- As long as the question is still visible on the main ref desk page (rather than just the archives), it should be seen. It may take a day or two, though. --Tango (talk) 17:35, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
: 15 June 2009
- Book review :Review of Cyberchiefs: Autonomy and Authority in Online Tribes
- News and notes: License update, Google Translate, GLAM conference, Paid editing
- Wikipedia in the news: In the Google News, London Review of Books, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Chemistry
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Purity comes to a sticky end
Sorry, Tango: I shouldn't make spelling jokes. They are apt to backfire, and I can hardly hold up myself as errorless. I can understand why your spell checker would accept both "glutinous" and "gluttonous"; it's just that they mean different things. I've never seen the greedy one ("gluttonous") spelled the same way as the sticky one ("glutinous"), not even when being gluttonous over glutinous rice. No matter; it's all among friends. :-) // BL \\ (talk) 04:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- I was all ready to concede defeat and only checked the OED on the off-chance and was rather surprised that it had that alternative spelling. I've never seen it before either, it was simply a mistake on my part - I guess I got lucky! --Tango (talk) 14:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
: 22 June 2009
- Special report:Study of vandalism survival times
- News and notes: Wikizine, video editing, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia impacts town's reputation, assorted blogging
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Summary: This month, we have details on our response to HMRC, updates on our Initiatives and Membership drives, as well as our regular sections on Press Coverage, Upcoming Meetups, and activities from the other WMF Chapters around the globe. We're also pleased to announce that we now have a Paypal account! We also want your input on the future of this newsletter - get involved! We are hoping to get the July issue out very early in July in order to fit with our new distribution schedule, so don't be surprised to see two newsletters in quick succession.
In this month's newsletter:
- HMRC Response
- Initiatives
- Membership Drive
- PayPal
- Press Coverage
- Other Chapters' Activities
- Meet-ups
- Newsletter Feedback
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Here you go
I see you contribute very helpfully on almost every question on almost all reference desks... Keep up the good work... So here you go...
| File:Allaroundamazingbarnstar3.png | All Around Amazing Barnstar | |
| For huge contributions in every field Rkr1991 (talk) 14:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC) |
I do wonder how you can know so much about every possible subject... Here's something interesting...Rkr1991 (talk) 14:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! The trick isn't knowing lots, it's knowing where to look things up. --Tango (talk) 14:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, here goes...
Q1 : I want to give a font to my user name, something like SpinningSpark's. How do i do it ?
Q2 : I wanted to add my name to the Reference Desk Regulars list but I think I goofed up somewhere, resulting my name coming on separately... How to correct it ? Rkr1991 (talk) 10:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- A1: Click on "My Preferences" at the top right of the screen, then on the first tab is a "Signature" section. Check (ie. put a tick in) the "Raw Signature" box and then you can put whatever wikitext you like as your signature. It is best to keep it fairly short, both as wikitext and when it actually displays on a page. It should also link to at least one of your user page and user talk page, preferably both (you have to enter the wikitext for the links yourself, they aren't done automatically if you have "raw signature" checked). And make sure it doesn't look too annoying or detract attention away from what you saying which is, of course, far more important than your signature! Good luck!
- A2: To include something in a numbered list you have to start the line with a hash (#). Also, that list is alphabetical, so you should put your name in the appropriate place (it isn't ordered automatically). Let me know if you have any problems! --Tango (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- Great ! Thanks ! One more question. I believe equations are inserted using TEX, or LaTEX. Is it an easy to use, interactive kind of software, or do you have to first read about it before you use it ? Rkr1991 (talk) 04:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- LaTeX is rather a complicated language but Wikipedia only uses a very small subset of it, so it's easy enough to learn. Help:Displaying a formula should contain everything you need to know. --Tango (talk) 17:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- Great ! Thanks ! One more question. I believe equations are inserted using TEX, or LaTEX. Is it an easy to use, interactive kind of software, or do you have to first read about it before you use it ? Rkr1991 (talk) 04:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Now something about the way you write tells me that you're a she. Am I right ?Rkr1991 (talk) 04:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- No, I'm male. My name is Thomas Dalton, I'm a 22 year old white British man with a pony tail. I've met several people in real life that I originally met here - they're never a bit like you expect them to be from how they write! --Tango (talk) 15:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks!
|
|
The Reference Desk Barnstar | |
| Thank you for answering my Earth as Time Keeper question on the Science Reference Desk! --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 03:51, 27 June 2009 (UTC) |
Heavily
I'd like to try Huggle, if possible, and to do that i need the rollback flag. Texcarson (talk) 00:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)