Jump to content

User:JMF/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User:JMF

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JMF (talk | contribs) at 19:23, 6 July 2024 (reminder). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Ticking time bombs

Flush this page

Inappropriate category challenges

Category:Political terminology Category:Linguistic controversies

replaced category per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 June 9#Category:Political correctness


span style="font-family

Main article: web-safe fonts
  • {{keypress}}: © © C
  • {{char}}: © cC © cC
  • Original char: © cC
  • {{code}}: © cC © cC is monospaced so a squeezed oval
  • {{samp}}: © the © the is also monospaced
    with font var: © the
  • {{para}}: |© the= |© the=
  • Unicode: U+00A9 © COPYRIGHT SIGN (&copy;, &COPY;)
  • © cC serif ⚕ : (span style serif)
  • © cC sans-serif ⚕ : (span style sans-serif)
  • Mono: U – U U
  • Arial: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ : (span style Arial)
  • Times New Roman: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ (span style Times New Roman)
  • Garamond: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ (span style Garamond)
  • Courier New: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ (span style Courier New)
  • Noto: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ : (span style Noto)
  • Verdana: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ : (span style Verdana)
  • Trebuchet MS: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ : (span style Trebuchet MS)
  • Georgia: Ç ç Ḉ ḉ Ḑ ḑ Ȩ ȩ Ḝ ḝ Ģ ģ Ḩ ḩ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ P Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ : (span style Georgia)


U+01D11E 𝄞 MUSICAL SYMBOL G CLEF

XT

x

auc

Why did I want to cite this?

Artistic canon?

Diffs

s:Institutes of the Laws of England wikisource

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2FPerennial_sources&type=revision&diff=983827787&oldid=983690192 {{Diff|page|diff|oldid|label}}

with this diff, xyz

this diff

{{Copied |from=Circular reporting |from_oldid=1043025893 |to=Circular reference |date= 8 September 2021 |to_diff= 1043111084&|to_oldid=1031982704 }}

Parishes

parish.[1]

References

  1. ^ "Contact your Parish, Town or Community Council". Milton Keynes Council. Retrieved 10 October 2020.

Circumflex

Gramadeg y Gymraeg", by Peter Wynn Thomas, University of Wales Press, 1996 edition, Appendix IV, sections 18 and 37-41

Temp

birkhauser.ch HTTPS links HTTP links

UK Census (2001). "Local Area Report – Akeley (11UB003)". Nomis. Office for National Statistics.

littlefish.co.uk HTTPS links HTTP links

yᷤ 𝔶ᷤ

Bringurst on typography

Bringhurst, Robert (2004). The elements of typographic style (third ed.). Seattle: Hartley & Marks. ISBN 978-0-88179-206-5. Denunciation of unspaced mdash is on page 80

See also

Look up anomalous in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Snowflake

  • U+2744 ❄ SNOWFLAKE and more.
  • U+2B65 ⭥ UP DOWN TRIANGLE-HEADED ARROW
  • U+2B0D ⬍ UP DOWN BLACK ARROW

Neoclassical facial canons of Farkas et al

sometime maybe

Type games

  • 𝕁𝕠𝕙𝕟 𝕄𝕒𝕪𝕟𝕒𝕣𝕕 𝔽𝕣𝕚𝕖𝕕𝕞𝕒𝕟
  • span style="font-family: monospace; font-size: larger" blah blah

Work in progress

Listed buildings etc

—

Climate

all done


Climate data for Woburn 1991–2020
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year
Mean daily maximum °C (°F) 7.4
(45.3) 		8.0
(46.4) 		10.6
(51.1) 		13.8
(56.8) 		17.0
(62.6) 		20.0
(68.0) 		22.4
(72.3) 		22.1
(71.8) 		19.0
(66.2) 		14.7
(58.5) 		10.3
(50.5) 		7.7
(45.9) 		14.4
(57.9)
Mean daily minimum °C (°F) 1.6
(34.9) 		1.5
(34.7) 		2.7
(36.9) 		4.1
(39.4) 		6.8
(44.2) 		9.8
(49.6) 		11.9
(53.4) 		12.0
(53.6) 		9.8
(49.6) 		7.3
(45.1) 		4.1
(39.4) 		1.8
(35.2) 		6.1
(43.0)
Average precipitation mm (inches) 55.4
(2.18) 		44.6
(1.76) 		39.6
(1.56) 		48.3
(1.90) 		51.9
(2.04) 		54.2
(2.13) 		51.2
(2.02) 		58.6
(2.31) 		55.4
(2.18) 		70.7
(2.78) 		64.5
(2.54) 		58.2
(2.29) 		655.3
(25.80)
Mean monthly sunshine hours 53.0 72.3 114.9 152.2 191.5 185.7 198.4 185.3 141.6 104.5 62.0 48.3 1,509.4
Source: Met Office[1]

References

  1. ^ "Woburn 1981–2010 averages". Met Office. Retrieved 11 February 2024.

Dates

  • {{today}} 2 November 2024
  • {{extract}} 2 November 2024
    • 2460617 julian day number
    • julianday
    • 20 October 2024 Today's date in the Julian calendar

—

Test area

  • U+025C
  • U+025C ɜ LATIN SMALL LETTER REVERSED OPEN E

Questions parked in a lay-by, pending developments

Fractional people are somewhat disturbing. Is there a cleverer way to express this:

Even at three or four people per square metre (0.28 or 0.37/sq ft) the risk is low; however at densities of five per square metre (0.46/sq ft) the possibilities for individuals to move become limited, while at higher densities (six to seven per square metre (0.56 to 0.65/sq ft)) individuals become pressed against each other, and can be unable to move of their own volition.

— Crowd collapses and crushes

Another editor has hand-crafted the 4 to 5/sq m case as (about 2.5 square feet per person

Reading RDT?

File:Bere Alston, Reading & Wokingham RJD

Follow up


Letters as letters, symbols as symbols

This page uses notation for orthographic or other linguistic analysis. For the meaning of how ⟨ ⟩, | |, / /, and [ ] are used here, see this page.

At the risk of mission creep, IMO we should make clear that the directive to use italics does not apply to the case of "letters as letters" or "symbols as symbols". In the latter case especially, the italic form may change the shape of the glyph confusingly or may not even exist at all.

For "letters as letters" or "symbols as symbols", do not use italic, bold or quotation marks. To set a letter off from surrounding text, use template:angbr (e.g., ⟨ŵ⟩). For symbols, use template:char (e.g., @). Do not hyperlink the symbol because hypertext underlining may confuse what is being shown: link its description instead (e.g., underscore, _ not [[_]]).

Do we need to address CJK, Arabic and South Asian scripts explicitly? I don't believe that the same issue arises, so I think not. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:41, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Diacritics

Hooke

Madame la Marquise

see user:JMF/Chastelet

Ball cites Stephen Peter Rigaud for the attribution to Clairaut, citing Historical Essay on the first publication of Sir Isaac Newton's Principia, p. 66

The Birth of a New Physics

  • "When Newton declined to credit authors who tossed off general statements without being able to prove them mathematically or fit them into a valid framework of dynamics, he was quite justified in saying, as he did of Hooke's claims: "Now is not this very fine? Mathematicians that find out, settle, and do all the business must content themselves with being nothing but dry calculators and drudges; and another, that does nothing but pretend and grasp at all things, must carry away all the invention, as well of those that were to follow him as of those that went before".[1]
  • In any event, by January 1684 Halley had concluded that the force acting on planets to keep them in their orbits "decreased in the proportion of the squares of the distances reciprocally"[1]
  • "Newton's" First Law: first stated by Descartes and printed postumously in his Principles of Philosophy" 1644.[2]
  • "Newton was therefore correct in his judgment that Hooke did not really understand the consequences of his guess that the attractive force varies as the inverse square of the distance and that he did not therefore deserve credit for the law of Universal gravity. This would have seemed all the more true in that Newton was aware that he did not need Hooke to suggest to him the inverse-square character of the force. Hooke's claim to the in- verse-square law has masked Newton's far more fundamental debt to him, the analysis of curvilinear orbital motion. In asking for too much credit, Hooke effectively denied to himself the credit due him for a seminal idea".[3]

Meteorology

"Hooke was our first meteorologist" 'Espinasse, p 50 https://archive.org/details/roberthooke0000marg/page/50/mode/2up?view=theater

Vivisection

"I shall hardly be induced to make further trials of this kind, because of the torture of the creature" (Hooke to Boyle, 10 November 1664, cited in 'Espinasse, p 52)


References

  1. ^ a b Cohen (1985), p. 150.
  2. ^ Cohen (1985), p. 153.
  3. ^ Cohen (1985), p. 221.

Harv problems

Cunningham, Michel; Roberts, Alan; Barbee, Anita P.; Druen, Perri; Wu, Cheng-Huan (1995). ""Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours": Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 68 (2): 261–79. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.261.

ref=CITEREFCunningham1995 works!

Double Dutch

Help with translating a section from an nl.wikipedia article that confuses Google Translate and Microsoft Translate, please? This is a bit wicked I know but I wonder if anyone can spare a few moments to help with a difficult translation, please? The vocabulary is obscure in both languages, which doesn't help. We are working to get Neoplasticism (Piet Mondriaan, Theo van Doesburg and others) up to GA standard: the article borrows heavily from nl:Nieuwe Beelding. We (well, Google and Microsoft) are struggling with this paragraph from nl:Nieuwe Beelding#Idee versus materie:

In zijn "Grondbegrippen der nieuwe beeldende kunst" stelt Van Doesburg vast dat in de kunstgeschiedenis twee soorten kunstwerken te onderscheiden zijn: kunstwerken die voortkomen uit de idee (ideo-plastische kunst) en kunstwerken die voortkomen uit de materie (physio-plastische kunst). Hij toont dit aan met een beeld van de Egyptische god Horus en een Diadumenos. Van Doesburg, maar vooral ook Mondriaan, voorspelden dat alle kunsten in de toekomst zouden verzinnelijken en alleen nog maar uit de idee zouden voortkomen. Het gevolg hiervan was dat de voorstelling (het object, de natuur) van ondergeschikt belang was. Het eindstadium van dit proces was de abstracte kunst. De kunstenaars van De Stijl gingen echter nog een stap verder en probeerden hun werk langs rationele weg te zuiveren van alles wat nog enigszins aan de natuur herinnerde.

The problem is the word verzinnelijken. Google Translate renders that as

In his "Basic Concepts of New Visual Art", Van Doesburg establishes that two types of works of art can be distinguished in art history: works of art that arise from the idea (ideo-plastic art) and works of art that arise from matter (physio-plastic art). He demonstrates this with an image of the Egyptian god Horus and a Diadumenos. Van Doesburg, but especially Mondriaan, predicted that all arts in the future would become 'reified and would only arise from ideas. The result of this was that the representation (the object, nature) was of secondary importance. The final stage of this process was abstract art. However, the artists of De Stijl went one step further and tried to rationally purify their work of everything that was still somewhat reminiscent of nature.

So now the Dutch word verzinnelijken means in context "reified"! If you translate only "verzinnelijken" (in double quotes) then it comes out as "to symbolise". If you type in 'verzinnelijken' (in single quotes) then it comes out as 'represent'. All of which is meaningless. And translate.bing.com suggests Van Doesburg, but especially Mondrian, predicted that in the future all the arts would 'symbolize' and would only emerge from the idea.

  1. "Reified" makes no sense whatsoever in this context.
  2. "All arts in the future would become symbolised" makes little sense but maybe "All arts in the future would be symbolic"? It certainly can't mean the (by then) very old-fashioned Symbolist movement.
  3. "Become represented"? No, another dead end.


Right of way

I drafted this

I wonder if we have hit a problem of en.UK v en.US usages? In the UK, the term "right of way" (except at road junctions) is used exclusively to mean the right to walk, ride or row across third party land. Vehicular transit is invariably precluded unless by a very restricted bilateral agreement between neighbours (that could be centuries old). Roads are not "rights of way" in British law; they are public highways open to all traffic. Railway lines and canals are state owned: the land on which they run was first compulsorily purchased (en.US: eminent domain) by Act of Parliament and subsequently nationalised. In the UK, long-distance trails [e.g, the Cotswold Way) were mainly created by chaining existing rights of way; there are some special cases like the Thames path through London where the relevant London Boroughs used their planning powers to require redevelopers to make available a transit route as a condition of planning consent. I think I recall that the Welsh government used compulsory purchase to complete the Wales Coastal Path.

but suddenly realised it is about the "public throughway" article, not about the "property access" article, which is where RWood wrote the post that prompted it. So saving it here as I expect that I will need to use it later.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JMF/sandbox&oldid=1233001028"