Jump to content

User talk:Knowledge Seeker: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Hey: Images for you to delete :-)
Karatloz (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 193: Line 193:
*[[:Image:Parthenon rec.JPG]]
*[[:Image:Parthenon rec.JPG]]
They're from my days of not understanding how the Commons worked. The originals are safe there. All are orphans save Lahresgarte; the commons original of this one goes by the same name, so the article will link directly to it once the local copy is gone. —''[[User:Encephalon|<span style="font-family:Times;color:navy;cursor:crosshair;">'''Encephalon'''</span>]] 01:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)''
They're from my days of not understanding how the Commons worked. The originals are safe there. All are orphans save Lahresgarte; the commons original of this one goes by the same name, so the article will link directly to it once the local copy is gone. —''[[User:Encephalon|<span style="font-family:Times;color:navy;cursor:crosshair;">'''Encephalon'''</span>]] 01:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)''

== Itchy Balls ==

Itchy Balls Itchy Balls<br>
I don't got no itchy balls?<br>
My itchy balls be itchin' itchin'<br>
So that is why I'm bitchin' bitchin'<br>
Itchy balls Itchy balls [[William Holden]] Itchy Balls.<br>
Out.

Revision as of 01:57, 30 March 2006

Archives:
Archive 1 (11/22/2004–4/1/2005)
Archive 2 (4/2/2005–4/30/2005)
Archive 3 (4/29/2005–6/12/2005)
Archive 4 (6/12/2005–7/27/2005)
Archive 5 (7/29/2005–10/4/2005)
Archive 6 (10/11/2005–12/23/2005)
Archive 7 (12/24/2005–1/30/2006)
Archive 8 (1/26/2006–3/4/2006)

Hi, and welcome. I like comments (and barnstars), so feel free to leave some. Please add a new section when starting a new topic, and please use ~~~~ to sign your comments.

I may add section headers and attribution for comments, and I may adjust margins and alignment for clarity.

History of Earth

Just read the article you have been working on, History of Earth. Fabulous work, keep it up. Joelito 21:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, Joelito! I'm glad you like it! It's definitely my most ambitious project, y no ha sido fácil, aunque algunos escritores me han ayudado mucho. I've wanted to write something like it for months, though it seemed insurmountable. Si encuentra algo que puede corregir o mejorar, feel free to pitch in or offer comments on the talk page. ¡Siempre puedo usar ayuda! — Knowledge Seeker 05:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge Seeker, I wrote to Joelito a message on his "talk page" and happened to see your article "History of Earth" mentioned. So, I decided to check it out and I'm glad I did. It is a great article, featured article stuff. Damn, I'm one of those guys who is very picky about what he reads and I found your article very enjoyable reading. When I worked on my Military history of Puerto Rico article, I did so, because nothing like it has ever been done before. Nowhere in the internet was there a project like mine. Therefore, I know first hand of the hard work and dedication you've poured into your article. I would like to congradulate you on your work and for me it has been an honor to have read it. Tony the Marine 04:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow; thanks for your comments, Tony. This is high praise indeed. You’re right about about trying novel ideas; there’s Timeline of evolution but I couldn’t believe no one had written anything like this before. Then again, it has been rather difficult even to come this far, and several good editors have been helping me out. I’m so glad you and Joelito enjoyed reading it! Despite my best efforts, the article is on the long side, and it's so easy to get caught up in “details” of this four-and-a-half-billion—year journey. I am hoping to get it to featured status one day, but I have a lot of referencing to do before I can even think about that. If you have any ideas, please feel free to suggest them. Incidentally, if you enjoyed this, you may be interested in Tufts University's Cosmic Evolution web site, which traces the whole history of the universe in detail, exploring scientific methods and such along the way. It kept me occupied for weeks! — Knowledge Seeker 07:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

This Tireless Contributor Barnstar is presented to Knowledge Seeker for his great work on the History of Earth article. Presented by Tony the Marine 05:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again, Tony. I very much appreciate the support and I hope I will be able to improve the article to do justice to this honor. — Knowledge Seeker 06:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The user at this IP ADRRESS is a computer in the Library of San Diego State University. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.191.17.38 (talkcontribs)

Thank you for letting me know. — Knowledge Seeker 04:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I, Encyclopedist, hereby award you the Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar for your positive, uplifting attitude and willingness to help others - along with your diligent service for Wikipedia.

Thank you, Encyclopedist—I’m not sure what I’ve done to deseve this, but I certainly appreciate it. I also appreciated your frank opinion of History of Earth; I do realize that it is rather unconventional for a Wikipedia article, but I still hope it will enrich Wikipedia in some way. Thanks again! — Knowledge Seeker 04:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Earth

Thanks for starting and working on History of Earth. It really sets right the odd feeling I used to have that something was wrong somehow back when I was editing History of the world. Not to mention it's a beautiful article, a pleasure to contemplate! --Arkuat 08:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arkuat, I appreciate the praise. I have really enjoyed working on the article, although it’s certainly been a challenge. Interestingly, it was History of the world that helped stimulate me to write this article (see Talk:History of the world#Page title). I’ve always enjoyed “big picture”–type matters, which is why I like History of the world so much. To me, though covering human history wasn’t enough—I wanted something to tie the planet’s whole history together, to give a sense of the time scale involved, and to show how physics, astronomy, chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and history all work together (and to a lesser extent, a bit of geology, anthropology, and so on). We’ve amassed so much knowledge and become so specialized that I think it has become quite easy to be unable to grasp the whole picture. Anyway I’m so glad you liked it. If you have anything to add or can improve its accuracy, please feel free to pitch in. — Knowledge Seeker 09:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Opinion?

Though I may have been difficult at times, I really appreciate your intelligence and opinion. I just wanted to say hello–and more importantly–ask for your opinion on something. I'd like to know what you think of my user page? I've been working on it for a while and would just like the honest opinion of a respected member of the Wikimedia Foundation. Please don't edit it without my consent, but I really would like some advice on how to perhaps update it for the better. Oh and also, it's me, Darwiner111, in case you don't know. I had my username changed[1] recently. Anyway, thanks alot for your time, CrazyInSane 16:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC) (formerly Darwiner111).[reply]

Hi, CIS. Thanks for asking my opinion. First I should be clear that I am not a board member of the Wikimedia Foundation, nor do I hold any especially prominent post. I’m just a Wikipedia editor whom my fellow editors have judged to be trusted with some additional tools. Your user page looks really good—you’ve obvoiusly put a lot of work into it. I think it gives a good picture of what you’re like. I find the switch between first person and third person to be a bit jarring. You start out using the third person; however, when you start discussing your interests, the first two “CrazyInSane’s comments” use the first person point of view; then you return to third person. It is appropriate to write the introductory material in the third person, but I think it makes more sense for you to write your comments from your own point of view. Also, as you must realize, people may be put off by your heavy religious activism—there are many, including me, who are turned off by attempts to push one’s political or religious views in Wikipedia. By coming on so strong, both on your user page and in other areas or Wikipedia, you risk alienating those who otherwise might agree with you. In my case, I had never given much thought to the Christian nature of AD/BC, and prior to your arrival I don’t think I’d ever used CE/BCE—but now that you’ve shown how religious AD/BC is, I probably won’t be using it anymore. (Understand I come from a religious, but not Christian, background.) Finally, I’d use an s in the possessive “User:CIS’s interests”. Hope this helps. — Knowledge Seeker 04:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My Suspension from Wikipedia

Dear Knowledge Seeker, I just wanted to let you know that I did not see the messages about the rule regarding editing pages. If I had seen this, or was aware of this rule, I would not have continued my editing. As for the talk page, I assumed that my reference to it in my note was enough. If it was not, I apologize and will discuss my edits properly from now on. I should also mention that I was not aware of the startard notice for a biased page, I had actually looked for it and not found it, but now that I know how to use it I will. But I do, none the less, believe that the evolution article is very biased and is in violation of Wikipedia rules. I feel that this issue needs to be address and not just disregarded on the talk page.

Thanks, 24.29.22.9 24.29.22.9 (talk · contribs)

Update: NOBODY WILL ALLOW ME TO DISPUTE THE ARTICLE THE WAY I'M SUPPOSED TO! They simply give me their pro-evolution comments and remove my tag. Help!
I understand that you didn't see the messages. Yet you surely must have gotten the notice alerting you that you had received new messages. Either you ignored it and the alert followed you from page to page, or you went to your talk page but did not read the messages. In the future, please be sure to read the messages people leave for you—blocking you from editing should not be the only way to get through to you. I don’t see why a vague reference to the talk page could explain what you thought was not neutral about the article. If one does not feel an article is neutral, the first step one should do is to make oneself familiar with WP:NPOV. Please read our neutral point of view policy, in particular WP:NPOV#Pseudoscience, prior to pursuing a complaint. The next step is to bring specific objections to the talk page; often the matter can be resolved through discussion, either through subsequent editing of the article or through consensus that the article is already neutral. Oftentimes an editor with a specific political or religious agenda may to try to influence articles, but their claims of bias may be judged to be exaggerated by the other editors. I must say that I do feel that the Evolution article is well-written, comprehensive, and neutral as it stands. It it is a featured article and has been through considerable scrutiny by both those who do believe in science and those who don’t. I believe the current article describes the science of it quite well, while also acknowledging that it conflicts with literal interpretations of the mythologies of several religions. — Knowledge Seeker 09:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

excellent --69.232.194.114 08:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. I’m glad you approve! — Knowledge Seeker 09:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Earth

Thanks for your edit! I noticed you're a geologist. I've done my best writing those sections, but I'm just an amateur, so any suggestions or corrections you have would be appreciated. Or, if you have some better or additional references than the one's I've come up with, please let me know. I hope you found the article interesting and accurate. — Knowledge Seeker 08:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have some of the literature ref's for the Hadean/First Millennium (I prefer Hadean, myself) section of the History of the Earth article. I would like to refer to the original literature within the text, but retain the useful external links that you and other editors have kindly provided. In particular, I would like to substitute reference 5 with a reference to a paper published last year in Earth and Planetary Science Letters (and perhaps revise the number somewhat to keep it in line with the reference). If you would be so kind as to create an "External Links" page at the bottom of the page and move the link there, I can begin substituting the references (my wiki-skills are, well, meager at best). As an aside, Some of the material in this section strikes me as having been taken a little bit out of context (i.e., not really wrong...but a bit misleading). I may have some time in the next few days to make it a little more self consistent. Thanks for taking on such an interesting article. Cheers, Rickert 08:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I very much appreciate the assistance. I changed the title to "The Hadean eon" although if you feel that "Hadean" alone is superior, please change it. I copied the Scientific American link to an "External links" section, as you requested. Please feel free to modify the reference. We're using the new Cite.php feature for automatic referencing. If you edit the section, you'll see the entire footnote enclosed between <ref> tags; MediaWiki converts it to a superscript and places the reference itself at the bottom. The numbering is done automatically. To update the reference, simply edit the section, remove the information currently between the tags, and replace it with your own reference—it'll automatically appear at the end of the article, in the proper order. (I'm not sure if you're already familiar with the system, and if you prefer, I'll gladly make the change for you.) If there are any others you wish to replace, you may just go ahead. I can always pull any useful links from the history. I apologize for any inaccuracies or misrepresentation. As I mentioned, I'm an amateur, and it's quite difficult to condense such vast information and knowledge into single paragraphs. Hopefully you can make clear up the inconsistencies while keeping the section concise. Again, thank you for your help—I'm a physician and a bit out of my element here. It's great to have a professional to help out! — Knowledge Seeker 09:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly *poke* (about AC)

I don't want to rush it, but I keep coming across situations were admin tools would be rather handy. For example I've been doing quite a lot of work on WP:RFI recently, and whilst there is quite a lot I can do there it would be nice to have that final resort of 'block'; as well as all the other fancy anti-vandalism stuff that comes with the mop. So what I'm basically saying is would you mind taking another look at my AC page to add any further feedback, and maybe an indication as to when to go for RfA (after sorting out any other suggestions you come up with first of course!). Thanks :-) Petros471 20:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! Work got a little busier than usual. I left a few comments but I'll try to give you some more detailed ones tomorrow. You'll make a great candidate! — Knowledge Seeker 07:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gratitude

Thank you for your guardianship of my vandalized user page and the subsequent (polite) warning to the user who made the change. I have made a new comment on the Shadow of the Colossus talk page with what I hope (but do not delude myself) is the same politeness and appeal for reason. It seems to me that the user at this IP address is a habitual vandal. Is there anything that can be done to quell, or at least curb, his enthusiasm for trouble?
ZorkFox (Talk) 07:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; it's my job! Yikes. That behavior is quite inappropriate. I'll keep an eye on him. — Knowledge Seeker 07:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re:disappointed

I am disappointed at your choice in section headings. My edit summary stated "the only method for classifying species is biological", not that there are no other classification schemes besides biological ones. The species is a unit in biological classification; it does not mean that no other schemes can exist or be beneficial, nor does it mean that the biological system is superior to all others. — Knowledge Seeker 07:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change it if you want. I was angry. — goethean 15:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's all right; I already noted there that you misrepresented my statement, and changing it at this point would make some of the subsequent comments spurious. In my opinion, when one is getting angry, it's better to take a little break from Wikipedia. That way one is less likely to misinterpret others' statements—being less likely to see bad faith and exaggerated claims—and less likely to provoke conflict. Arguments made from logic and reason, not from emotion or anger, tend to be more convincing, as well. Hope you're feeling better now. — Knowledge Seeker 03:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Encephalon RFA

I know that you have been trying to get Encephalon to run for administrator probably almost as long as I have. I got lucky and caught him at a good time, but I don't wish to hog all the fun. If you wish to co-nominate, you may do so at User:Knowledge Seeker/Encephalon nomination. I have been drafting my nomination statement and it is nearly finished. I think we're planning to go live this weekend. — Knowledge Seeker 07:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I've taken you up in your offer, if you don't mind... :) By the way, what is that sign on your signature? I've been curious all day as to what it is... Titoxd(?!? - help us) 06:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good! It seems only fair. Any suggestions for changes? Do you think it's good enough? Regarding my signature, it's a letter in Bengali, the language of my people (see Bengali script). It's a beautiful language, with a beautiful written form as well. — Knowledge Seeker 03:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok the weekend has come and gone. If you guys don't hurry up, I will nominate Encephalon myself. Paul August 05:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may not be aware of this, but the rules for RFA were changed some time back; while one may create a nomination, it shouldn't be added to WP:RFA until the candidate accepts the nomination. In any case, Encephalon has previously declined nominations made without asking him first, and I preferred to give him time to answer the questions before posting the nomination on WP:RFA. — Knowledge Seeker 07:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me

Hi, Knowledge Seeker. I desperately need your help, please. Can you please completely delete the page User:1929Depression/*CENSORED*?? This would be greatly appreciated as it is an emergency. Thank you VERY much. CrazyInSane 20:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC) [comment modified][reply]

I'm happy to help, but it looks like Ilmari Karonen already deleted it. Let me know if there's anything else I can do. By the way, you may wish to remove the remove the wikibreak notices from your user page, since it looks a little silly to keep editing with the notices posted. — Knowledge Seeker 02:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wow

Wow. You've completely put me to shame. I'm thrilled to see the strong support you're getting, although of course you deserve it. It's about time you joined the ranks! — Knowledge Seeker 05:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Thank you, for all your support, and all that you've taught me. ;-)
  2. Don't be ridiculous, buddy. Your rfa was held one year ago§. At the current growth rate of WP membership (still on an exponential curve, I understand), rfa participation cannot properly be compared across such time frames (without correction). Besides, no one who knows anything about you can have the slightest doubt that should you, for whatever reason, go up for one of these things today, your support column will look very much like the one here. :-) So no more talk of this shaming nonsense, please! Besides, I refuse to believe that BDA has in any way shamed me. ;-) —Encephalon 15:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC) §This is a hint. ;-)[reply]

Hey

I want to thank you first, and most, of all, Seeker.

Your're the best. —Encephalon 06:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, you're welcome. Although you know there's no need to thank me—there were several other people wanting to nominate you, and you easily would have succeeded even with a self-nomination. Thank you for allowing me to nominate you. And I did have an ulterior motive in wanting to get you to be an administrator. Certainly I thought you deserved it and would be able to accomplish tasks easier with administrative powers. And hopefully it will be an inducement to continue your great work here. But more than that, Wikipedia needs administrators like you. I am concerned about the general level of civility and of open-mindedness here, not just from administrators but from all users. The best leaders lead by example, and it is important to show how we feel discussion and interactions should take place, as well as to show that we can accomplish more through rational explanation and calm discussion than through name-calling and wheel warring. I wasn't exaggerating when I said you're the kind of administrator I'd hope to be. I'm glad you've finally agreed to be an administrator (although I miss the days you'd leave me messages to delete images for you). — Knowledge Seeker 22:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aww. Ok, delete the following ;-)

They're from my days of not understanding how the Commons worked. The originals are safe there. All are orphans save Lahresgarte; the commons original of this one goes by the same name, so the article will link directly to it once the local copy is gone. —Encephalon 01:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Itchy Balls

Itchy Balls Itchy Balls
I don't got no itchy balls?
My itchy balls be itchin' itchin'
So that is why I'm bitchin' bitchin'
Itchy balls Itchy balls William Holden Itchy Balls.
Out.