Jump to content

User talk:BillC: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Generator Picture
Demkina RFM
Line 398: Line 398:
unless you felt like animating it! That would be cool. Color would be nice. Perhaps some straight lines joining the N and S poles, labelled with a
unless you felt like animating it! That would be cool. Color would be nice. Perhaps some straight lines joining the N and S poles, labelled with a
phi to inidicate flux. --[[User:Wtshymanski|Wtshymanski]] 02:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
phi to inidicate flux. --[[User:Wtshymanski|Wtshymanski]] 02:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

== Demkina RFM ==

{{RFM-Filed|Natasha Demkina|Natasha Demkina}}

Note: I haven't noticed your involvement in the article in a while, so I don't know how involved you want to be in this process. I think it is needed (possibly long overdue), is all. You don't need to get involved, I just thought I should included you as a potential party. - [[User:KeithTyler|Keith D. Tyler]] [[User_talk:KeithTyler|&para;]] <small>([[WP:AMA|AMA]])</small> 18:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:36, 14 April 2006

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Ragib 2 July 2005 23:15 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for catching the potential copyright problem at this page. Nice work! --HappyCamper 23:43, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you're interested, you can check out Wikipedia:Copyright problems. The instructions there are much simpler to follow than votes for deletion, if you've ever tried processing VFDs. On the very odd occasion when I first started, I've encountered other users complaining about these things being handled incorrectly by me, but I sort of shrug it off and think there's a first for everything and try to learn from it. At times I find it really enjoyable to combat copyright problems and vandalism of sorts on Wikipedia, and it only takes practise to do it well. If you want to dabble in this sort of stuff just make sure along the way you don't get burned out, and you'll do fine :) Thanks for those links - I'll process them right away! --HappyCamper 00:10, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For your hard work on the Red Links Project

Barnstar

BillC,

Thanks for finishing up the Red Links Project! For your dedication, I award you the Working Man's Barnstar. Use it only for good, and never for evil. Thanks again! – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 12:58, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

gothic vs. gothic revival

thanks for pointing out the important difference re. Charles O'hea page Eric A. Warbuton

Hey there!

Hi BillC - I remembered a while ago you helped out with some copyright issues here on Wikipedia. I am now an administrator, and I just wanted to let you know if that if you ever need me for something, I'll try my best to help out - always feel free to leave a message on my talk page. See you around the Wiki! --HappyCamper 13:15, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Only articles about individuals are covered under CSDA7. --Ryan Delaney talk 07:43, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Hertfordshire puddingstone, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.


Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Codex Calixtinus, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.


Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.


Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article adynaton, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.


Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Cyril Arthur Pearson, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.


Admin

I have nominated you for adminship. Go there to accept if you feel like it. --Wonderfool t(c) 16:18, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Guestbook

My first guestbook signature on Wikipedia - what a neat idea! Plus, it rhymes too! :-) --HappyCamper 16:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've now deleted its talk page. Usually, the talk page is deleted as well, unless there are reasons that it should be kept; here are no real reasons to do so. Thanks. Enochlau 22:27, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments and pointers on the enduro page I updated, I have now removed the stub tags. Slowly finding my way around! Kcordina 10:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the transformer

Thanks for the new picture at transformer. Could you do one for leakage inductance that shows that not all the flux links both windings? --Wtshymanski 18:45, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice illustration for leakage inductance, thanks! I have some drawing tools, maybe over the Christmas break I'll get a chance to do an equivalent schematic. --Wtshymanski 18:21, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Demkina article

I agree that it would be useful to get rid of the disputes and opinionated rambling in the article. Doing this, however, does not necessarilly require getting rid of detail. It should be quite possible to have extensive encyclopedic detail about a topic without having POV pushing occur, it just requires some restraint placed on those who want to push a POV. In this case, this should probably be done by gaining a consensus among the other editors. I also think that the article replacement needs to have sufficient detail within it to warrant a full replacement of the original article. It should probably even have a summary description of the points regarding the experiment which were subject to critical debate, I just think this should be written by someone who can write it in a neutral way which simply describes the areas disputed, rather than tries to persuade that opinions are correct. FRJohn 20:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The statistical analysis is essential, because most people have no intuition for the statistical likelihood or unlikelihood of getting a result. Many people have intuitions that place "half right" as the typical value, so they think someone would get 3 or 4 right just by guessing. But this is quite wrong, as shown by the math, where the actual expectation value is 1 correct. It is important to specify this as part of any meaningful description of that test design. After all, the goal here is to write an informative encyclopedia entry which can help readers make their own decisions, rather than to placate the agendas of people involved with a situation. As such, the reader needs to be given the knowledge necessary to make those decisions. I believe this includes a detail of how likely each result is, as well as a description of the major points of criticism regarding the experimental setup. Then the readers are equipped with the necessary information to make their own informed decisions about how to interpret the events, rather than being fed an answer. FRJohn 20:58, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
One group of people think the test is valid, one group of people think the test is invalid, and of course, an additional much larger group do not know if it is valid. If the test is valid, the statistical analysis tells exactly how to interpret it. If the test is invalid, or dubious, then it is invalid or dubious. Since the test WAS performed, the proper approach is to explain how to interpret the results if you assume it is valid, and to explain what the major criticisms are which question its validity. The statistical analysis is fact because that IS how you interpret such a test if it is valid. The problem is, the article has been focusing on a banter back and forth between whether or not she has an ability, and reads like a playground argument. So the solution is simply to equip the reader with the available information, and then not try to interpret whether or not Natasha Demkina has any ability. This requires editors who are determined to demonstrate to the world that Natasha Demkina does or does not have any ability, to either change their editing habits, or refrain from editing the article. Unfortunately, there will not be a resolution until one of those two occurs, and I'm afraid that you and I will not be able to hammer out a lasting solution until something is changed with the combating editors. The article will simply expand with time and each side will keep trying to prove their point to the world. Wikipedia does not work well when this occurs. I don't believe that removing all relevant information will provide a solution. FRJohn 22:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am about at (or have passed) that point myself. My mistake was offering a comprehensive NPOV rewrite, which I've generally had good success at in the past. Askolnick is not familiar with WP or perhaps even with a general purpose encyclopedia; he is more familiar with scientific journals, such as those he writes for and has edited for. - Keith D. Tyler 19:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SVG version??

I have seen the picture Image:Single-phase_transformer.png: it is very nice. In the comment, you say you created it with Inkscape, so why didn't you upload the SVG version?? as far as I know, Inkscape is meant to be used mainly for creating SVG images. Alessio Damato 19:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weeze

Hello BillC,

Thanks very much for the message. All the copyright and related information to Weeze is okay for use in wikipedia, because I work in the Town Hall in Weeze in Germany and am responsible for the PR-stuff, whether on the internet or other media. I have personally translated all the german texts into english and am also responsible for the photos which I placed on the weeze-wikipedia-website. In the rush to get the information placed on the site, I made the mistake of not always logging on! Sorry. The German and English websites (which I also linked) - to include information on Weeze's twin-town Watton has also been cleared for use by me because it is also on the Weeze website - were my doing and as such I would be grateful if you would release them for public viewing again. Thanks very much. Khalid Rashid 12:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bill, Thanks for the response and the information. Once again I would like you to know that I am responsible for the content of the information provided on the Municipality of Weeze website and as such have my employer's approval for the use of the contents contained on this site. However, I will take your advice and try to improve upon copyright and tone issues. The text on the twin-town of Watton will also be improved. So give me a couple of days to sort things out. This was my first venture into wikipedia and I am more than willing to learn as to how to use wikipedia. And sensible advice from some one with experience in wikipedia is more than welcome. Therefore thanks for the tips. 194.77.253.245 07:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bundi

Hi, Actually I have neither added not removed any information on the Bundi page -- only composed it to read better. Many of my page-changes appear more major than they actually are, because I also get rid of white space and repositon images: this gives the impression of largescale paragraph erasures/additions, which in fact has not been attempted. ImpuMozhi 14:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry but I have very little experience with images. I ventured to upload some images a few days ago, to embellish some film-star pages with, on the premise that film-star images can be disseminated without fuss; I was however mistaken, and the images the images were soon erased. So I am no good at this, sorry. ImpuMozhi 18:39, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SVG does it better :-)

The SVG format is harder to create but it works much better: PNG is a bitmap, with a limited definition, while SVG draws pictures using vectors. It has a higher quality and it needs a very small space.

Make this test. Put the following code wherever you want (in the Wikipedia:Sandbox, for example):

[[Image:Single-phase_transformer.png|1000px]] [[Image:Single-phase_transformer.svg|1000px]]

check how the SVG version looks better :-) Just find a way to fix the subscripts and to remove the empty white space at the bottom, and we'll use it on the Transformer page. If you can't, I'll try to do it when I have some time.

By the way: it is a very good picture: did you make it from scratch, drawing anything without any help?? Until now, I used Inkscape just for minor changes in already-made pictures... Alessio Damato 19:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The subscripts look alright. Why did you change the flux symbol?? it was absolutely perfect before. It was exactly like a while now it looks like an empty set... Alessio Damato 20:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry, I can't help you that much. SVG is a new format, and its support within software is increasing, but it is still far from being stable and consistent. I have several programs supporting SVG, but they have different outputs one from the other. Moreover Wikipedia has its own engine, so you can't be sure of the output as long as you don't upload it.
Here is what I can suggest you to do. If you create an SVG image, make it consistent, with its own structure. For example, the idea of putting the subscripts manually won't work very good because the rendering engine (whichever you are using) doesn't know you want to make a subscript, so it will behave differently from what you expect. I don't know if SVG provides a way to write subscripts. When I had to write one, I just used Ns instead of Ns. I know, it is not exactly the same thing but it works. Moreover I can't add Greek letters to any SVG, that is why I have been quite surprised to see a proper in your first graph. But then I realised you couldn't see it properly, so I think it is a problem within Wikipedia.
About now, just publish the SVG version of the PNG you updated, then we'll be waiting for the Wikipedia engine to be improved. Report on the PNG page that there is an SVG version, too, and vice versa, maybe somebody else will note the problems and will find a way to fix them. Alessio Damato 15:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
the picture in Transformer is absolutely great, congratulation! I have to start using Inkscape as well. How did you sort out all the problems you got?? what about that matter of the arrows? and the greek Phi? Alessio Damato 15:49, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
the very last thing: I noticed you proposed the image as a featured one. As you have seen I supported it but: why did you make the current pointing outside the transformer? I think it is widely accepted to make it pointing inside. Moreover, why did you uploaded it and candidated it here in en.wiki, wasn't it better to make it in commons.wikimedia?? Alessio Damato 01:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
about the arrow: it does not matter that much, as long as it is consistent with any mathematical formula within the document. There isn't any mathematical model for the Transformer in its page, but I might add it as soon as I have some free time. As you say in the featured images page, conventionally, in a 'two-port network' as is shown here, current is defined as positive for flows into the device; that is absolutely right. Since the encyclopedia has to be consistent, I think it is better to use the same conventions for all the two-port networks. Aesthetically the picture is not affected at all. About commons, since the second colored version looks better I suggest: upload the final version overwriting Image:Transformer3d_col.svg, remove (or request it) Image:Transformer3d_col3.svg because it will be just a copy, finally upload it in commons with the name Image:Transformer3d_col.svg, using the same description. The wiki-engine will take care of the fact that the two images have the same name. It will create no problem at all. Bye :-) Alessio Damato 18:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transformer

Be bold Bill. Just do your thing on transformer. We could do with some action!--Light current 20:07, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

THanks Bill. I think your diagram looks pretty cool now- and we can read the legend. Well done!--Light current 21:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Transformer as FAC?

I don't think this article is ready for featured status. Who decides these things? --Wtshymanski 18:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flux_leakage.png

I really like this diagram but i was jus wondering if its possible to increase the text size for the labelling of the currents? Theyre a bit small when the image is produced at normal size like in leakage inductance. THanks for reading.--Light current 20:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How about now? --BillC 23:33, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Luton flashover

I have started a section on substation design and protection, and I would value your input on something. It is the Luton flashover and related matters.

The Luton flashover was interesting becuase what happened was that an arc from a HT conductor to earth occured. This short then caused circuit breakers to open becuase of the overcurrent. Too many protection devices were activated and then everything went to pot. The defense against such an overreaction in the event of such a fault which I was told about was that a substation has all 'earthed' metal work isolated from earth except for one cable which passes through a current transformer. If current is detected in the earth cable then the location of the fault is clear to the protection electronics. Hence with good design of the protection systems it is possible to open fewer circuit breakers then it would be otherwise. The problem is that I do not have the references to back up this design concept which I was told about some years ago by a substation expert.Cadmium 21:31, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I do know about the Luton flashover is that it occured at a very large substation/switching station in Luton ( you can see it from the M1). The event started as a phase to earth arc/short. I do not know much more about the event, I do not know the date on which it occured. But I imagine that it was pre 1970s.Cadmium 22:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, I do not think that the section was too UK centric. I have seen that some of the other parts of the world do things differently. eg I saw at a Czech substation that sheep can be used as a means of controlling the grass in one part of the compound (or somewhere to graze them) but I imagine that while the Czechs use different voltages for transmission lines (and different grass control) the basics of how the system works will be the same.Cadmium 00:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bill, Thanks for your input on the subject of power outages. I have heard of quite a few cases of big outages which have started with small foul ups which then snowball into a big outage. Would you feel OK about improving the Power outage page to explain more about the physics of how power grids can fail in this Cascade-based way.Cadmium 21:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Animated GIF

This looks broken to me.
This looks fine to me.

Hi Bill!

To begin I would say that on my system, Image:3-phase flow.gif runs pretty nicely - it doesn't seem jerky or anything to me. I'm not on a fancy system (Athlon XP 1500+ w/512Mb XP/FF)

I put together that animation by making a solid model in Autocad, animating it in 3d studio max, exporting it as (if I remember correctly) an uncompressed AVI (functionally identical to a series of bitmap frames, just all in one file), then opening it in Jasc's Animation Shop (makers of Paint Shop Pro), which I used to compress it into an animated GIF.

Certainly, Animation Shop did some optimisation on it (mapping identical unchanged pixels to transparent, reducing number of colours) which might lead to better performance... as I say, though, I don't see a problem with your current animation. I could take a shot at recompressing yours for you if you're sure there's something wrong with it.

I wasn't sure whether the optimisation got lost anyway if/when the software resizes our images so I decided to have a look at what happens. Looking at the images to the right, I see mine broken and yours fine. Perhaps my map-identical-pixels-to-transparent causes the brokenness in my image - that would also fit with yours not having the same problems.

Incidentally I recently broke my installation of Jasc software so I've been trying Photoshop/ImageReady. I wasn't aware ImageReady did animated GIFs. I have investigated and it seems to do all the optimisations I used except for 'map identical pixels to transparent'. I would guess, then, that that is the optimisation making the difference between the two animations.

Cheers! Mike1024 (t/c) 23:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Williams

Info from www.markwilliams.org.uk

Autotransformer

The variable transformer picture in the transformer article is actually a Superior Electric Powerstat rather than a General Radio or Instrument Services and Equipment Variac. Variac is certainly used extremely widely as a generic term, but is it ok to use it in the caption of the picture? -C J Cowie 00:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The General Radio trademark was cancelled in 2002. In 2004, Instrument Service Equipment Inc. submitted a new application to the US Patent and Trademark Office and is apparently about to be granted the trademark. In the practical sense, it must be fair to say that variac is a generic term. In the legal sense, that is apparently not the case. There might be an interesting story behind this, but I already feel foolish for looking this up. I would not be inclined to revise anything beyond the caption unless someone complains. -C J Cowie 02:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Transformer3d col3.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. ~~~~

Congratulations, and thankyou for making it for us. It is a great diagram. Raven4x4x 06:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I rather like the edits to the page. And about the {globalize} tag, I always try to see things from the other persons perspective. If we can not admit out short falls and blind spots here than all we do is create the proper atmosphere for an edit war, and an edit war serves no real purpose. As they say, "Pride goes before the fall". TomStar81 00:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Piedras grandes

Yes help would be appreciated on the mopping up, please - and if you would, add your voice to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Contributions_needing_attention - Thanks much! KillerChihuahua?!? 22:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may find WP:VAND more helpful for the test templates. Don't forget to use subst. KillerChihuahua?!? 00:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tap changer

BillC thanks for doing such a great job on the merge and the diagram. THe article has now got everything in it that I originally intended. I've added the actual tap changing sequence detail from the diagram that I was a bit hazy on before. --Light current 17:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OOh yes thats superb Bill. Only comment is can you make it operate a bit more slowly so we can follow the action?. Then it would be great to put in the article I think. Animated encyclopedias - how modern!--Light current 21:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biil, that is absolutely superb now! Really informative. I wish more people wuold put as much into graphics as you do. Well done& congratulations!!--Light current 23:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aussie flag template

Thanks for the heads up, I will go and try to double check it. I suspected that a couple of mistakes might have crept through as I did all the maths involved in my head. --Martyman-(talk) 09:58, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that is a pretty obvious mistake. I obviously just copied text from Alpha Cruxis and didn't update it to the new values, Oops. I will try to get a new version up tonight, thanks. --Martyman-(talk) 10:00, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keratoconus Page

Hi Bill, I see some more improvements have been made to the page. It is really starting to take shape. I am very new to Wikipedia, so I'm still a little hesitant to contribute untill I understand the process fully. In saying that I did add a link to KCGLOBAL.ORG (Now I see that I should have discussed this first, sorry) I just felt that it has more international coverage and that it contains a wealth of data. This information covers both the standard and unconventional approuches to treatment. If you feel that there is already enough representation of public action groups then I'll gladly remove the link. Also, I'm gathering some information regarding Mini A.R.K that may be able to be used to give readers a little more insight to the procedure. I do not want to turn the article into a selling platform for the technique but I do feel, as do many others, that it is a valid operation that warrants inclusion. So the trick I guess is to provide the data in a raw non judgemental format and then allow readers to decide for themselves. In much the same way as corneal graft or the use of contact lenses are. --Hari 08:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hey, Bill. Thanks for your note. I just left a couple suggestions on the peer review page. Great work! AED 23:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your latest note. Unfortunately, I also do not have easy access to the publications that would help expand the history section. Keep up the excellent work. Due to your efforts, Keratoconus is the best ophthalmology article I've seen in Wiki! -AED 09:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just looking at the section when you posted. Looks good! -AED 21:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update. You've uncovered lots of good information. -AED 05:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I just saw the update on my watchlist and I was going to send you my congratulations. Congratulations!-AED 06:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intacsonfinger2.jpg

Thanks for the heads up. I checked the licensing before linking to the picture but didn't realize the need for a separate rationale for each article. In reviewing the info at Image_description_page#Fair_use_rationale, I noticed that each usage of a fair use image should also have a comment in the article itself pointing to the rationale at the image description page. I personally think that's overkill, but I took the liberty of adding such a comment to the keratoconus page. Thanks again. adavidw 05:02, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Mediation

Hi BillC. I’m not mediating the Natasha Demkia dispute, that would be difficult since I’m on one side of the dispute. In the Cabal Mediation request, I agreed to serve as a mediator for another case, and have been assigned one. The mediator for my Natasha Demkina request is User_talk:Rohirok. I guess the question on the request page looks like it might be asking if I am willing to mediate my own dispute, but if you check out the Request for assistance page, it explains the question a bit better. Unless I misunderstood your comments.

Perhaps my attitude on the Natasha talk page is wrong because I’ve offered to serve as a mediator in other disputes? I believe other mediators have withdrawn from mediating the Natasha dispute because of the aggressive approach of Mr. Skolnick, but I’m not sure what the best route to take is. I just don’t like being attacked, and would rather work with people who want to make an honest, civil effort to move the discussion forward. Mr. Skolnick doesn’t seem to want to do that. If I had been mediating the Natasha case, I probably would have withdrawn by now - having become a target for Mr. Skolnick.

I respect your feedback, so if you think I need to answer Mr. Skolnick’s questions, please let me know. I don’t feel that he is arguing in good faith, and seems to be continually on the attack. I'm awaiting mediation at this point. I’m a fairly new user, so I may be completely wrong.

Besides, the talk page there is way too long already. :) Dreadlocke 16:27, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


attack templates

{{db-attack}} is for pages that already exist, and were created to disparage their subject. {{attackuser|somebody's_user_name}} identifies an user account that was created to disparage somebody's_user_name. For example a username registered as "User:Ralph28 is a noob-face loser" would be tagged as {{attackuser|Ralph28}}. But an article called "Ralph28 is a noob-face loser" would be tagged as {{db-attack}}, make sense? (My apologies to Ralph28 if such a name actually exists.) — Mar. 13, '06 [02:45] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Zweisimmen

FYI: [1]. -- User:Docu

Hey

Just to drop by and say a word of greetings! How are you these days? Have your interests on Wikipedia changed lately? What sorts of things are you focusing on at the moment? --HappyCamper 16:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll await for your return from Sweeden. I hope you are having a wonderful time! Take pictures of the sunset for Wikipedia if you get a chance! --HappyCamper 13:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article quadrature phase booster, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.
Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article August Müller, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 11:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Two Years' Vacation, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

August Müller

Great article! Enjoyed it very much! Cheers -- Samir T C 12:02, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 'single sentence paragraph' anon

Thanks for getting in touch. I also reverted a very similar edit to James Chikerema which was by 216.194.56.12 who I suspect may be the same editor as 216.194.4.132. Definitely someone to watch. David | Talk 17:46, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


No problem, I thought that might happen anyway. Badgerpatrol 18:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Molinology

True, the debate does look pretty one-sided. I was going to suggest that since the nomination wasn't in bad faith or anything it should be left open, but I notice the nominator has switched to 'keep' as well, so ok, I'll close it out. Good job with the rewrite, anyway. Flowerparty 07:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re Deviated Septum talk page

I was a little hasty to start using the talk page as a message board. I will attempt to become more acquainted with wikipedia rules and guidelines. I made this account a few years ago however I have only used used it on a few occasions. Anyways, I put in a request for an article about Nasospecific. If you or anyone other editor wants to feel free to set it up (if the topic currently deserves its own page; I am not entirely certain about this yet). I put it under the Health Science section.Nizhny

Criticizing BillC in the Proper Place

Hi Bill, this time I got to the right place (thank you for the direction). So, as I said, it is nice that you corrected things and explained that you are not a wikipedia administrator, but only Skolnick's most helpful "friend"... You know that my position is that many times apple polishing serves no one. And the intances when you engaged in such questionable actions are clearly representative of it. Anyway, your priceless contributions have been added to my update page about Natasha Demkina.

After all, someone has got to be impartial around here...

Best Regards Julio Siqueira Julio Siqueira 19:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV in Egyptian Land Reform

Thanks for pointing out the issues with POV in Egyptian land reform. I'll add some numbers and citations of scholars to back up those assertions, they weren't meant as a judgement by Wikipedia, but by the scholars and I failed to make that clear. Thanks again! Cool3 19:12, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for taking it in good grace. Cheers, --BillC 19:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a couple of quotes are the best way to eliminate the POV, could you please tell me the proper format for citing a quotation? Thanks, Cool3 19:27, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I inserted one quote into the article with an MLA style citation (author then page number) referring to one of the references listed at the end of the article. I'd be very thankful if you'd format it for me. Thanks, Cool3 19:45, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help on Egyptian land reform, I think we've got it all straightened out now. Have a nice day :-)!

Corneal topography

Great work on another great article! Did you want to mention in the caption that the map is of a keratoconic eye? Any way to get a hold of a maps of spherical and regular astigmatic corneas? -AED 21:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am the wife! :-) Thanks for the advice on the redirect pages is great. I will try to figure it out after church. I do believe you will find him notable enough to keep him. I see lots of other folks who deserve bios, can I do them too? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizlash (talkcontribs)

Articles for deletion

Since I can't make the delete entries, I put them here. Maybe you can make them Wikipedia:Articles for creation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.87.103 (talkcontribs)

Hi, with regard to the above AfD, I have been contacted by the article author, who was newly-registered, and told me she created the article under a misunderstanding about what WP was for. She was apologetic, very good-natured about it, and seemed to have acted in good faith. Given that the AfD vote is very one-sided, and that it is probably an embarrassment for her for it still to be up, is there any chance of this one getting closed off soon? Thanks, --BillC 07:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, if the author requested deletion, I suppose it could be tagged under CSD G7. Usually, the admin who deletes it would like to see the original author add the tag, or see the discussion by the author that led to its tagging. (Personally, I am unable to close an AfD of this nature, since I am not an administrator.) Cheers — TheKMantalk 09:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Keratoconus front page nomination?

I think you've done an excellent job on presenting a very informative article. The front page is well overdue for a medically-oriented article, so I can't see why this one wouldn't be accepted. Although they probably wouldn't bother Wikipedia's target audience, I have one or two concerns that I'll attempt to bring up in the article's talk page. -AED 03:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "harder to separate Signs from Diagnosis". I agree. I am not positive what Wikipedia:WikiProject Clinical medicine/Template for medical conditions has in mind. Books and articles vary on how they subcategorize the discussion of diseases. Some combine "signs and symptoms", other state "signs and diagnoses" or "signs and detection". To me, symptoms, signs, and diagnostic tests could all fall under "Diagnosis". I'll think about it a little more to see what may work best in Keratoconus. -AED 23:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?

I nominated Charles Schepens for Did you know? If you have any suggestions on how to improve the article, please feel free to do so. I found a great image of him here, but it's probably copyrighted. Any idea on how to get a better image for the DYK page? Thanks! -AED 08:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sudish and Medish

The Sudish and Medish races may not meet the requirements. The Xanthochroi race along with all other races I added are from historical race scientists and not from this website. Dark Tichondrias 22:12, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's clarify which ones we are talking about. Sudish and Medish are the only ones from this website. Now, I Googled Medish race and found it mentioned on Stormfront White Nationalist Website under subraces of Europe, so it is mentioned on other websites.

I Googled the Sudish race and it's mentioned on Stirpes discussion page about physical anthropology. I Googled the Medish race again, and it's mentioned on the Skadi Germanic forum. These are both independent sources.

I guess they are not reliable sources. Delete only those two. The others are from historical race scientists.Dark Tichondrias 22:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==Welcome to VandalProof== Thanks for your interest in VandalProof! You've been added to the list of authorized users, and feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page if you have any questions. AmiDaniel (Talk) 22:15, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Download Is Now Available

I just wanted to let you know that a download of VandalProof has recently been made available. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

County flowers

Following the AfD debate, you may wish to join in a discussion taking place at Talk:Plantlife. SP-KP 18:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: British Library

There is nothing I need at this point but I appreciate the offer! Thanks! -AED 22:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiletics

I would not normally be so quick to jump the gun, but the article has been previously deleted (speedily) one month ago. Also, this does not seem like a case where expansion would help the article's case - WP:WEB would apply to even the best-written articles. I do understand your concern though. (ESkog)(Talk) 01:08, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Tichondrias's "historical definitions of race" articles

I thought he had run out of them, but apparently not! Do you think they all merit a Wikipedia article? --Lukobe 06:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--ping me when you're back! --Lukobe 19:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Generator Picture

Hi BillC: Yes, the figure you proposed is something like what I'd think is useful in the article. I wouldn't show 4 stages in the rotation, unless you felt like animating it! That would be cool. Color would be nice. Perhaps some straight lines joining the N and S poles, labelled with a phi to inidicate flux. --Wtshymanski 02:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demkina RFM

Template:RFM-Filed

Note: I haven't noticed your involvement in the article in a while, so I don't know how involved you want to be in this process. I think it is needed (possibly long overdue), is all. You don't need to get involved, I just thought I should included you as a potential party. - Keith D. Tyler (AMA) 18:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]