User talk:Pocketthis: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:15, 22 December 2017

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Pocketthis! Thank you for your contributions. I am DeltaQuad and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

-- DQ (t) (e) 00:23, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of Sky

Thank you very much for the concern and the suggestion. Please feel free to make change with the photo/text in the way you think is right or good. Again thanks. M. Tawsif Salam 21:49, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From Pocketthis

I like to keep a clean talk page, and will delete most or all messages within 24 hours of replying here to them. This is not meant as disrespect, I just like a clean house. Pocketthis (talk) 18:09, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for you!

thanks for the welcome and here is a pie for you! Thegabster (talk) 16:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Twilight photos

Thank you for removing the 13th photo. To make room for the new arrival, I was looking to remove one of the least popular already there, but don't know how to check for hits separately from those of the whole article. In terms of appropriateness, many of the existing 12 fall short, in my opinion, of illustrating anything special about twilight as such, other than visual appeal. Hertz1888 (talk) 16:57, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr. Hertz, nice to hear from you. Well, let me try to address both points you made. The 1st one is simple. You click on the photo, then click on the "description page", which will take you to its commons page. Then you click on history, then page views. First it gives you the hits in commons only. That number is important, because it is the number of times the general public has clicked on the photo in commons to find a twilight photo for their website or whatever. Any photo in commons with over 50 hits a month is pretty high. Then you have the option to pick the language. For us here at Wikipedia.org, of course that would be English, which is at the top of the scroll list....then click "Go". This number reflects directly on the hits from the Wiki page it is viewed on. Since Twilight doesn't get much action, anything above 125 hits is pretty good. Some of those photos however, have upwards of 600 hits per month. I go through every few months, and check the hits, and make exchanges when needed. As far as the visual appeal is concerned, YES I agree. However, since Wiki has the most unbelievable storage of magnificent photos in the world in commons, it's nice to be able to let the Twilight page be enhanced by their beauty. Also, in my opinion, Twilight is the most beautiful time of the day, and deserving of some beauty on the page. Thanks for stopping by...your friend,-Pocketthis (talk) 17:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for for explaining the procedure in such detail, and for the friendly welcome. I tried out the procedure and see how it is done, and that is good to know. I will leave the photo reviewing and exchanging process to you, and try to be helpful in other ways if I can, as the need arises. The Twilight article provides a fine opportunity to showcase those beautiful views. Friendly greetings to you. Hertz1888 (talk) 20:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is easy to be friendly and courteous to those whom have shown the same to me. Thanks for your reply, and I am here to help out whenever I can be of assistance. I wish I were a better science editor, but my B.A. is in Photography, and Music. I try not to stick my nose in where it doesn't belong, but I am doing a lot of reading here, and a lot of learning as well. I'm not too bad at grammar, so I have been of some help in articles in that area, as well as always looking for those creepy vandals.....lol-Thanks-Pocketthis (talk) 21:23, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Propane Cost

Hi Pocketthis, Your EIA source for the average propane price was the right one - I only corrected the date and the price, which is what the EIA released a few days ago as being the average price for October and inserted a non-scientific comparison. Nicolas.dasnois (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pocketthis, I've sourced the average US price, reinserted the tank comparison and added (and sourced) the East Coast and Midwest average October 2013 prices. Surprisingly, the EIA doesn't include California in its weekly and monthly pricing surveys (unfortunate, given how many people use propane) so I'm happy to reinsert your $3.60/gal reference if you think it would add value.Nicolas.dasnois (talk) 16:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK NIck, nice job. I made your name blue today to give your edits more credibility.-Pocketthis (talk) 16:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see

User:Smallbones/Questions on FTC rules - Smallbones_(smalltalk) 13:06, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos Torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos Torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:23, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Sir....:)Pocketthis (talk) 00:26, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Would you mind if I move File:Paintbrush silhouette.jpg to Commons as English Wiki is not really the place for photos? Pierre cb (talk) 03:13, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pierre, it is on commons:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Paintbrush_Silhouette.jpg It has a Capitol S for silhouette, so the connection was never made. You can delete the one on this site if you like, it's already on commons. Thanks-Pocketthis (talk) 03:23, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	We really do appreciate all of the photographs you contribute. They are of great value to the project. HighInBC 14:39, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cola bottle for you

	For you Pocketthis :)
	I want to offer you a bottle of Coca-Cola, and myself that quell tensions. Thank you for your comments, thank you. ... Lhealt _(talk) 17:53, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fan of your bee photography.

I looked at your photographs, all of them are amazing but some of them are even more. Yes, you guessed it. Those photographs with insect in them are truly beautiful. Thanks for sharing them on Wikipedia and make it a better place with your contributions. People like you, who are willing to do some effort selflessly for wellness of the world are real precious and current extreme necessity . Keep up the good work!! Thanks! P.S. Those photographs of different plants were also equally beautiful.Napsync (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice of you to make the effort to leave this message. Thank you, it is much appreciated. Pocketthis (talk) 19:15, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cloud article restructure

Hey, Pocketthis, thanks for your message on the cloud talk page! I've cloned the history section of the cloud article and copied another Wikipedia article called 'timeline of meteorology', and posted both clones in my sandbox so I can do the work of merging the two without disturbing the original articles until I'm ready to formalize the transfer of text. I've calculated that transferring most of the history section out of the cloud article will shorten it from the current 117,000 bytes to just over 100,000 bytes. The latter is within the length guidelines of Wikipedia articles that cover the other major weather elements and have received GA or FA ratings, which, if I can get the same for the cloud article, should help discourage undesirable tampering with the article in the future after I kick the bucket! I plan to leave a just a very short history summery in the cloud article with a link to the timeline piece which will then be Wikipedia's one main article about the history of meteorology.

I guess you've noticed the cloud cross-classification table I first posted last summer and hopefully perfected last October with the help of another editor who kindly made some major cosmetic improvements beyond my skill-set to compliment the content improvements. I had wanted for years to include something like this with the article, but it took me a long time to figure out how to do this type of computer graphic. It might seem like an obvious type of table to put in to help readers sort out the various major cloud types and provide a highly readable overview of how the classification system works. But the fact is a table of this type with the cloud-form titles on a horizontal axis and the altitude-range titles on a vertical axis has never been published before by anyone in the history of civilization, not even by the World Meteorological Organization! All previous tables, even in the WMO International Cloud Atlas, have grouped the major cloud types by altitude range OR by form, but never both at once in an integrated cross-classification table. It's also the first table ever that combines tropospheric clouds with clouds above the troposphere. I have drafts in my collection of personal projects that date back to the 1970's, so finally getting this table published on a globaly distributed page is the realization of a lifelong dream!~~ChrisCarss Former24.108.99.31 (talk) 14:37, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chris: I am very happy for you that you are finally getting what you've been striving for in that cloud article. No one has put more work and effort into any article on this site. You deserve some satisfaction. However, you and I both know that you won't ever be done with that article...lol. You will even come back from the grave and haunt wikipedia to get changes implemented there. I supported you in the talk thread not only because you are the most knowledgeable person I know with their head in the clouds, but also, I believe in you. You are the only person on this site that makes changes to an article on my watch list, that I don't even bother checking. "You are Da Man". Can't wait to see the edits implemented. Respectfully, Pocketthis (talk) 15:57, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you overwhelm me with compliments! Thank you and be assured the cloud article would be much diminished without your photographic contributions, and your occasional reverts of rogue edits! I'm still working on restructuring the two articles and transferring content between the two. It's a fairly big project and I only have limited time to devote to it right now. BTW I don't fancy being planted in a dark damp hole in the soil after I take my leave of this mortal coil, so I've arranged to be cremated so at least the lighter particles of my ashes can float among the clouds as condensation nuclei. As for not being able to "take it with me", I might have any favorite projects that are in paper form placed with me in the pine box so we can all go up in smoke together ;-) And if I need to haunt Wikipedia anytime in the posthumous future to get anything changed, I'll descend from the clouds to do so! ~~ChrisCarss Former24.108.99.31 (talk) 13:40, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got a good laugh from your haunting story, and you can also be assured that I too am being fried, and then sprinkled under the clouds over my two dog's graves here on my property, where 99% of all of my photos are taken from. I envy your enthusiasm, and look forward to seeing the finished product that we both know will never be finished. → Pocketthis (talk) 15:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great job!

Loving the pictures you are adding to your user page! Reb1981 (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

lol....thanks...Love the fact someone is actually looking. :-) Pocketthis (talk) 22:03, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incivility

Hello. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on DUI California. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Hey, I noticed that some of your comments on the talk page for this article could be construed as uncivil. This is just a friendly, respectful reminder, and I respectfully suggest you read WP:UNCIVIL. Thanks, Mitch G 74 00:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've got enough edits on this site to know what's going on here Mitch. You're right. I wasn't civil on that talk page. I am civil when others deserve my civility. The moron that wants to change the title of the page, simply had to message me and have a discussion about it, and I would have agreed to figuring out a new name with him. You don't just show up one day in an article that is just getting its feet under it, and place a name change citation on the page. It was an absolutely rude, and disrespectful move on his part, especially since he wrote a similar article about Maine. I'm sure he'd just love it if someone came along and didn't at least have the courtesy to contact him about a potential name change on his article. Civility works in both directions Mitch. Happy editing→Pocketthis (talk) 00:15, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 112: / Line 112: @@
 ==Incivility==
 [[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors [[WP:OWN|do not own articles]], including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors&nbsp;on [[:DUI California]]. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|welcome page]] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Hey, I noticed that some of your comments on the talk page for this article could be construed as uncivil. This is just a friendly, respectful reminder, and I respectfully suggest you read [[WP:UNCIVIL]]. Thanks, [[User:MitchG74|Mitch]][[User talk:MitchG74|G]][[User:MitchG74/sandbox|74]] 00:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)<!-- Template:uw-own1 -->
+*I've got enough edits on this site to know what's going on here Mitch. You're right. I wasn't civil on that talk page. I am civil when others deserve my civility. The moron that wants to change the title of the page, simply had to message me and have a discussion about it, and I would have agreed to figuring out a new name with him. You don't just show up one day in an article that is just getting its feet under it, and place a name change citation on the page. It was an absolutely rude, and disrespectful move on his part, especially since he wrote a similar article about Maine. I'm sure he'd just love it if someone came along and didn't at least have the courtesy to contact him about a potential name change on his article. Civility works in both directions Mitch. Happy editing→[[User:Pocketthis|Pocketthis]] ([[User talk:Pocketthis#top|talk]]) 00:15, 22 December 2017 (UTC)