User talk:Tamfang

Welcome

Hello Tamfang and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you've chosen to join us. This is a great project with lots of dedicated people, which might seem intimidating at times, but don't let anything discourage you. Be bold!, explore, and contribute. If you want to learn more,

Wikipedia:Bootcamp teaches you the basics quickly,
Wikipedia:Tutorial is more in-depth, and
Wikipedia:Topical index is exhaustive.

The following links might also come in handy:
Glossary
FAQ
Help
Manual of Style
Five Pillars of Wikipedia

Float around for awhile until you find something that tickles your fancy. One easy way to do this is to hit the random page button in the navigation bar to the left. There are also many great committees and groups that focus on particular jobs. My personal favorite stomping grounds are Wikipedia:Translation into English and Wikipedia:Cleanup for sloppy articles. Finally, the Wikimedia Foundation has several other wiki projects that you might enjoy.

There are a few crucial points to keep in mind when editing. Be civil with users, strive to maintain a neutral point of view, verify your information, and show good etiquette like signing your comments with four tildes like this: ~~~~ If you have any more questions, always feel free to ask me anything on my talk page or ask the true experts at Wikipedia:Help desk. Again, welcome! -- Draeco 05:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC) Make sure to use the edit summary field when editing articles, and to mark minor edits accordingly. This helps other users easily identify your changes. Thanks! Mrtea (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vampire (Buffy)

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Kudos. It's a good starting article. I moved it to Vampire (Buffyverse) to be in keeping with some other articles that we (see below) have been maintaining, but of course you weren't expected to realize that. I'm going to work on it some in the coming days, but it's got all the essentials. Thanks a lot for that.

You might want to consider signing on to the efforts at WikiProject Buffy. Stop on by and see what we're about. :) - Che Nuevara: ^{Join the Revolution} 18:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

White Willow as in Chosen? nope, just the search term I tend to used when working on plant databases. --Salix alba (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hey! Thank you VERY MUCH for the major improvement on my webpage. I know it was a small thing but it made that table (and the whole page) look much much better. I will try to duplicate it on the other table there. Please feel free to edit more! :-) Lawyer2b 01:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heraldry generally

Re heraldic bucket shops - good point. I would like the referral to go straight to definition 4 but havent worked out how. It was definition 1 out of 3 but I removed it to 4 and inserted No 1. Yes, I have in mind to write articles about how arms pass (to women, etc) incl England & Scotland & exceptions to each, coparceny, bogus arms & fake titles and bad heraldry. Kittybrewster 23:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added Hamilton House and amended Scottish country dance

A benevolent wish to drag numerous people from ignorance to enlightenment without it really hurting much. Kittybrewster 03:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to edit this, i am just correcting the link of what the above was referring to. Simply south (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usurping arms

It's only fair to indicate in the edit summary when you propose an article for deletion. (And maybe a merge would be more appropriate?)

I'd also like to suggest that you notify the creator of the article when you prod an article. Prod is for uncontroversial deletions only, so it's particularly important that we not side-step controversy by keeping things on the d/l. There's a template available at {{PRODWarning}}. NickelShoe 00:51, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plurality of Baronets

Two people in a room, both called Sir John Moore, are collectively the two Sir John Moores present in the room. The word Sir is never pluralised. Kittybrewster 23:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object much to the change, but this absolute claim is rubbish. —Tamfang 00:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think so? Do you have any authority to say it is rubbish? Are you not an American? Kittybrewster 12:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is your authority to say what is never said?

Would you say "Lord Mars" rather than "Lords Mar"?

I find "Sirs John Moore" more logical than "Sir John Moores". "Sir John" is short for "a knight (sieur) named John", and "two Sirs John" is short for "two knights named John". (I also prefer "Johns Moore" to "John Moores", because a surname is more like an adjective, because there can be two Johns in one family but not one John in two families, and to avoid the ambiguous appearance of a surname that happens to be plural in form as many are.)

One says "Sirs" when addressing more than one, and I heard once that when two knighted actors (Olivier and Richardson, I think) were in the same production the rest of the cast referred to them as "the two sirs"; so much for "never". —Tamfang 16:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said what is never correctly said. "The two sirs" is a solecism and was probably used in the knowledge that it was horribly wrong. The word Lord is a noun, in contrast to a titular prefix. "two Sir Johns" is the correct abbreviation for two knights named John. It seems equally bizarre to pluralise John and Moore but it is the surname rather than the christian name that gets pluralised. Possibly because that is what one would do if they were both Mr - the Mr Moores rather than the Misters Moore or the Mr Johns.Kittybrewster 11:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've seen "Messrs Moore" far more often than "Mr Moores".

"two Sir John Moores" strikes me as most likely to mean two of something named after a Sir John.

—Tamfang 16:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. "Messrs Moore" is certainly fine. But "Sirs John" I am afraid is not. I think the usual phrase would be "This is the first time I have found myself in the presence of three knights" rather than "three Sirs" - and of course the chances are against their all being called Sir John. Kittybrewster 00:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Brooke-Little

Anton...with your interest in heraldry, I thought you might like to join in the peer review of John Brooke-Little's article. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Keep up the great work.--Evadb 15:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'll turn my head with such flattery! As it happens, the officers of arms are an area about which I know little. —Tamfang 17:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well...it was worth a shot. I've been reading your contributions to rec.heraldry for years and you seem to know much about heraldry. I thought I'd try. You're welcome to add check for spelling errors. :) --Evadb 21:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dashes

See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dashes)

"The hyphen, or more accurately the hyphen-minus (-), is the shortest dash-like character visually. Traditionally, this was used only for hyphenating words, creating line breaks, or as the minus sign."

and

"The en dash (–) is slightly longer than the hyphen and figure dash and about half the width of an em dash. It indicates duration, such as when you could substitute the word "to" (as in a range of dates). An en dash placed between numbers or in compounds does not have spaces around it: for example Paris–Brussels timetable, Ages 7–77. Some writers, however, prefer to place a space on either side in complex ranges: January 1, 2003 – December 31, 2004. The en dash can also be used as a hyphen in compound adjectives in which one part consists of two words or a hyphenated word: for example, pre–World War II period . . ."

The Manual of Style does list several styles, saying to be tolerant of what other editors have used. It doesn't mention using hyphen as n–dashes, which is what I think you're advocating, but I don't want to get in an ongoing disagreement over it. I'll leave any changes to your discretion. Dvd Avins 00:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you make of the Paris–Brussels timetable example? Dvd Avins 02:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a range (though not a range of numbers). I'd be less willing to accept a dash in Champaign-Urbana (the double town where I grew up) or Mary-Anne or Spencer-Churchill. —Tamfang 02:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see "well-placed" as something other than a hyphenated word? —Tamfang 02:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heraldry

Thanks for catching the vandal who removed the section. Eternal vigilance pays. --EncycloPetey 06:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grass and mass

Just curious do you pronounce "ass" in "grass" and "mass" the same way? --Philip Baird Shearer 13:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I pronounce the ass in grass as in arse and the ass in mass as in ass, so I do not see why a French accent mark on a word to tell anyone how to pronounce a word in English when words like Cirencester do not have any such indicators. --Philip Baird Shearer 19:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How can common English pronunciation of English words be miss pronunciation? That words are not spelt as they are pronounced in English makes it a punny language, but we could follow this down a Mousehole, (or into a pub), so I guess we will have to agree to differ.--Philip Baird Shearer 21:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quebec English

Thanks for cleaning up those links! Thanks also for updating the version in my sandbox! CJ Withers 20:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dominick Browne, 4th Baron Oranmore and Browne

Thanks for adding the bullet indents, for some reason when I tried to do that it gave me two bullets not a doubt indent distance. There's not much else to wikify now do you think we can remove the cleanup tag?Alci12 16:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"cite" v "allege"

Hi Tamfang, regarding the criticisms of capitalism section, I take your point that some criticisms such as a tendency toward oligarchy and imperialism are contentious. But others listed there, such as inequality, unemployment and economic instability pretty obviously are not merely "alleged" problems. To put it another way, neither "cite" nor "allege" can suffice to adequately address all the phenomena listed.

Therefore I have altered the sentence structure somewhat toward what I think is a more neutral expression all around. Regards, Gatoclass 07:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heraldry Portal?

Hey. I've proposed the creation of an heraldic portal. If you think that such a thing would be helpful, you can voice your support HERE and hopefully we can get the heraldry category items organized better. Thanks for all your hard work on heraldic topics.--E va ^db 08:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merlin Hay, 24th Earl of Erroll

"Does he also succeed his father as chief of Moncreiffe?"

No. At least he doesn't seem to have but there is something wrong here and I think wiki has erred. What seems to have happened is that their eldest son inherited the earldom and changed his name to Hay so he could become Chief of the Clan Hay, their younger son (The Hon. Peregrine) kept the name Moncrieffe so he became the Chief of that Clan. However Scottish_clan and Clan_Hay list the earl with the surname Moncrieffe which he can't have or Lord Lyon wouldn't recognise him as clan chief.Alci12 17:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irgendwer RfC

I've filed a request request for comment at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Irgendwer and your input would be appreciated. --rehpotsirhc ^{█♣█ ▪ Talk} 05:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and a barnstar

I award this Barnstar to Tamfang for assuming good faith.

I am extremely impressed and greatful for your "translation" here. I made an attempt to do so, but simply could not make sense of it. As I noted earlier in the discussion, I do not have the intestinal fortitude for prolonged edit wars, and have removed myself from the fray, but have been watching with keen interested. Keep on keeping a level head, and happy editing, --D-Rock (talk) 06:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo! —Tamfang 06:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Fürsts of Schwarzenberg

I agree completely and will do so, just didn;t have the time! Where does it go? Congrats on the Barnstar. Johnpallen 20:12, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fürsts of Schwarzenberg

There seem to be some serious issues with this article, largely due to hoaxing by Johnpallen (talk · contribs). (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earl of Amersham). Looks like I was premature in nominating this article for AfD, but I am unclear how to clean it up. There seem to be some gross discrepancies with the House of Schwarzenberg article, even after you remove the hoax presumptive heir. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fürsts of Schwarzenberg. Seems to me we need one (only one) article about the family, and should restore Karl Philipp Fürst zu Schwarzenberg to this version and remove the information about his descendents from there. But why isn't Karl Philipp listed as a prince in House of Schwarzenberg?? I'm really confused here. Fan1967 05:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully we can find someone who knows something about the family who can clean these up. I don't think we need to delete any of them, just figure out what's what. Fan1967 05:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Convex

Thanks for your note. When a word is being used in its normal English-usage way, for example "convex" meaning something physical that is curved consistently outwards, there is no need to link the word. The same applies to almost any adjective. The fact that other authors felt a need to link to "convex" when there is no article for the sense of "convex" they are intending does not mean to me that the articles should either link to "Convex" the disambiguation page or "Convex set", an overly technical and overly specific term. I think the links should be removed, or if they must link to something, that they should link to the Wiktionary entry for "convex". You disagree, and I can respect that. I won't revert anything you've done. If there are other pages linked to "Convex" that fall into the category that I would remove the link from, feel free to move the link now, so that we don't go through the double work of my removing the link followed by your putting one back. Dpv 05:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work!

I saw you organized the list of Unseen characters who were spoken of for a long time and then eventually seen. It looks much nicer now! --The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 07:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irgendwar

Serge and I are of the opinion that it's time for arbitration. Neither of us have the time to properly prepare the evidence necessary to request arbitration, and I was wondering if you felt the same and would be willing. I'll happily be a full party to the arbitration if it should be started. (Our discussion: User talk:Serge Issakov#Irgendwar / User talk:Saxifrage#Arbitration?) — Saxifrage ✎ 19:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The procedure is laid out at Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration. I haven't opened any before myself, but I've read many and I can try to help with setting it up if you have questions. — Saxifrage ✎ 20:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nomeculture

Hi Tam, its sort of described in Template talk:Polyhedra DB. Basically take the initials of the words in the long form names, with capitals for Tetrahedron etc and small letters for modifiers, s - stelated. So great truncated Cubeoctahedron becomes gtCO. Not far removed from Bowers system, he basically does the same but adds a few vowels to make then real words. --Salix alba (talk) 19:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Second front

I think I've accidentally stumbled on a communication method that works: stay on message, have only one message, and utterly ignore the flamebait that he throws out in his frustration as if it wasn't there. We'll see if I can keep him focused on the issue at hand long enough for him to actually grasp what it means and why his edit is problematic. — Saxifrage ✎ 06:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Bitruncated cosmotetron stereographic close-up.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Bitruncated cosmotetron stereographic close-up.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Omnitruncated tesseract stereographic (tCO).png

Thanks for uploading Image:Omnitruncated tesseract stereographic (tCO).png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Solar Boat

I have searched for this with zero result: some Seventies song ends with the narration "But now we must descend, for there is another side to this vision." It may be the same song that contains the line "Freud and Jung are holding hands and saying I'm with you." Does either bit any bells? —Tamfang 04:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be "Solar Boat" from the album The Golden Scarab by one Ray Manzarek, of The Doors fame. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Academy ratio

Hi Tamfang,

Just wanted to let you know that I've reverted your edit because the concept of integer ratio aspect ratios for imaging formats was (to my knowledge) a creation wholly associated with video standards many decades later. AMPAS standardized the Academy ratio by thousands of an inch, and this includes two different standards - one for the camera aperture and one for the projection aperture (the latter is always smaller). Both of these can be found on the list of film formats page, and as you can see by doing the math, neither is close enough to 1.375 to suggest an 11/8 ratio. One is around 1.374 while the other is closer to 1.370. I don't claim to understand the specific choice of sizes, but I think it's fair to say that the numbers don't match. Please feel free to contact me or discuss on the article talk page if you want to continue to the conversation. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola 20:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agorism

Thanks for your response the agorist page. If it doesn't bother you, could you answer a few questions? I'm kind of interested in political philosophy (I'm no authority on the subject, obviously) and this is a bit puzzling. How can people respect public property without coercion? And what are the criteria for public property that should be respected as opposed to public property that should be privatised? Thanks for your time :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onias (talk • contribs) 10:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no authority on agorism, either, and cannot answer these questions. —Tamfang 19:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway. --Onias 19:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article candidate review: Buffy article

Hi

You maybe interested to know that the article 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' has recently been nominated as a candidate to become a featured article. Should it become a featured article, it will be possible for the article to appear on the Wikipedia main page on March 10th 2007, the 10th anniversary of Buffy (the premiere, "Welcome to the Hellmouth" aired March 10th 1997).

Any feedback you can offer to improve the article and/or to either object or support the nomination, would be wonderful. Thanks -- Paxomen 18:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zune unraveled... unveiled

I was too lazy... LAWL!!! LOL... I was questioning the use of diction or wording. I looked up that word Wiktionary too between unraveled and unveiled when I committed that inclusion of that statement... It seemed good to me but anyways good job hehe. Getonyourfeet 01:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Straw poll on free software categorization of POV-Ray

Since you previously commented on the categorization of POV-Ray, can you please comment in Talk:POV-Ray#Free_software_categorization_straw_poll Karnesky 22:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you...

...for your edit to The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power, I must have missed that wikilink somehow... Yours, Smee 05:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Wodehouse family

Hello. I saw your question on Talk:Earl of Kimberley. The answer is yes, P. G. Wodehouse was a member of this family. I have tried to explain how he was related to the Earls of Kimberley at the Earl of Kimberley page, so you might have a look there. Regards, Tryde 15:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Martlet

Coat of arms seems more appropriate. I rushed that stub out a while back. Thanks for the increase in accuracy. Excaliburhorn 16:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No hope at all

re: this... I should have you copyedit me all the time! Gud, veddy gud! <g> // FrankB 06:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of you to say so. —Tamfang 06:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, t'was truly a thoughtful edit. Check out the last on Queen Victoria and see if you agree with the substitution of progress for change. I'm tottering on a fence rail on whether that 'tis a better change in the context. Change is beyond dispute... but? // FrankB 06:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technological progress is also beyond dispute. Some might dispute that the social developments constituted progress, but such a view is not respectable enough that I'd go out of my way to appease it – wait until someone complains. —Tamfang 08:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uneven hips

Hi there.

On the Science reference desk under "Left shoe squeaking more than right" you wrote

One of my hips is crooked enough to make my stance and tracks asymmetrical; nobody noticed until I was about 16 and Mom asked "Why does one foot turn out when you walk?" (though it later occurred to me that an embarrassing incident at age 9~10 could be blamed on it). Perhaps the questioner has some similar subtle asymmetry.

I am really battling to solve my various problems and I would be interested if you could elaborate a bit more about your problems, the cause, and the various doctors you may have seen...
I am functionally flat footed (this means that my feet aren't 'actually flat but they function as flat feet because they roll in - yet I do have an arch.
But the odd thing is... My right foot rolls in a lot more than the left foot. And overall the left foot is pretty normal - so that's just one right foot that tends to roll in (over-pronate).
The next problem is that my right hip socket always feels 'loose' (while my left hip socket seems fine and stable). There is also though to be a functional leg length discrepency, i.e. a difference in the length of my legs but only functionally and I've had a scanogram taken of my legs to measure the length of the bones and the bones are both the same length! This indicates that my pelvis may be tilted OR my one foot is rolling in OR a combination of the two that ultimately make the legs function at different lengths1
I'm a bit lost as to what to do about it...
Podiatrists tend to give me interesting feedback on what's happening with the FEET and can't tell me anything about the pelvis or legs... and
Chiropractors/Osteopaths all tell me that my pelvis is tilted/twisted but can't tell me anything about my feet.
So the podiatrists are all saying "You need orthotics" and all the chiropractors are saying "you need to come in often to be manipulated" and I don't know to do! Is my problem my feet or my pelvis!
Anyways, I've seen now 4 podiatrists and they've all recommended orthotics so I'm going to bite the bullet and just go with those and hope for the best. The problem is I'm very skeptical about them and I won't be satisfied until I understand exactly how orthotics are made and what they do - you know I just can't trust the things, they seem so unnatural.
Anyways, tha's the end of my rant. Any feedback on your condition is appreciated.

Which doctors have you been do
Have you been formally diagnosed with anything
What treatments have you had
How does your condition affect you, i.e. do you complain of things like a stiff neck, lower back, bad posture, etc.

Thanks Rfwoolf 19:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe my crooked hip is to blame for chronic intermittent pains in the knee on that side, which I first noticed while bicycling; once in a very long while (typically after climbing stairs) the knee fails to support me while bent. I've noticed no other serious consequences. The only medical attention it has had was the x-ray to verify that, yeah, it's a bit crooked; and that was thirty years ago. I can only wish you luck. —Tamfang 19:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if i could find it on my own

i wouldnt have asked, but i tried to use that info on this page to add it to the richmond article, but a user on that article claimed that this article did not say that and since i did not own the book i could not say it did. do you have any suggestions?^{Cholga is a SUPERSTAR}¡Talk2Cholga!_{Sexy Contribs} 06:29, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

[1] - WP:CIVIL. Corvus cornix 01:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jesse McNally

An article that you have been involved in editing, Jesse McNally, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse McNally. Thank you. Edison 18:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote for whether Gun Nut deserves deletion or not

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gun_Nut --BillyTFried 23:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

block

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 162.119.64.112 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Netsnipe ► 02:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised to find myself blocked – I thought logging in would override any IP address restrictions, and I'm not aware of anyone else using this desk. —Tamfang 01:16, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fountain

Sure, though I didn't actually make that image. I just noticed it on Commons and linked it. More interestingly, I've just about finished gathering references to revise and improve the article on tenné. I hope to have an authoritative revision done within the next two weeks. --EncycloPetey 07:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Victim disarmament

Tamfang, I was thinking of putting this article up for deletion. What do you think? It's just something out of somebody's book. I don't think it has much currency. It probably doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Griot 05:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!!!

Hi Tamfang, Thanks so much for your offer! I've sent you an e-mail, I hope it went through? --Ibn Battuta 18:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Unseen character

An article that you have been involved in editing, Unseen character, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unseen character. Thank you. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: soil conservation

I laughed so hard at your little content-free essay, I nearly choked. (You turkey. :-) ) —Steve Summit (talk) 02:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2007 September 18#soil conservation. —Tamfang (talk) 07:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I'm still getting the hang of this Wiki-thing. However, you're the second person to bring up my lame linking abilities. According to the cheat sheet I'm supposed to parenthesis then insert my web address, a space, and then the word followed by another parenthesis. Where am I going wrong?! About Rodenbeek... what about Ro den beek? By all translations I can find this would read red in the stream, right? Thanks again, Tamfang! Beekone 16:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irregular editing

Thanks for fixing my forgetfulness. Circeus 06:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia guidelines and policy

Hi. I just read your thoughts on trivia and I was wondering if you would be interested in this.

Here is a wikiproject proposal for trivia and a fresh look at trivia policy by the admins. Support the wikiproject proposal. Add your name to the list here: [wiki project proposal for wikitrivia]

Please send this link to other users that you feel would be interested. Thanks Ozmaweezer 14:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lutyens Link

Thanks for adding the Lutyens link on the 9th Earl of Jersey page mate.

Gorkysfc 21:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hip Hip Hooray

I have replied to your comment at Talk:Hip Hip Hooray. --Dweller 10:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

districts

Here is a link to the National Library of Scotland website. http://www.nls.uk/maps/. The index on there has details of the maps on which the one of Atholl was based, rather roughly I'm afraid. There is some change in some of these as they evolved, for example there is on on there that is split into two with "older divisions" on the left which I believe is based on 1500s or earlier maps of Mormaerdoms and Lordships, that one shows some difference to some of the later ones. I have changed the caption in the Atholl picture to say "showing roughly the district of Atholl" as it is not exact and changed over time. All the maps of the earlier divisions of Scotland changed quite a bit as well, for example Moray, Galloway, Carrick and Annandale varied greatly from when they first appear in the medieval era to when some of the maps on the NLS site show them. Benson85 (talk) 03:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firefly

Saw your edits on the Firefly article. They're good. Any time someone can make a sentance less wordy, its gotta be a benefit. -- saberwyn 00:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi Tamfang, I'm User:Keegan. Once upon a time, when I worked on the Maurice Minnifield article both as an IP and editor, you helped in its creation. Back then I was TKE.

I'm now a sysop, and I went ahead and gave you rollback privileges which are now available to editors and admins can grant. I was browsing around and thought you could use it. The function is to reduce bandwidth and server load in reverting simple vandalism and test edits. If you don't want it, I can remove the function as well.

Additionally, let me know if you are interested in adminship, if you feel it would aid in you editing of the encyclopedia. Keegan^talk 06:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link Keegan^talk 06:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gömböc

I have replied to your comment at Talk:Gömböc. You posted it a few month ago so I'm not sure you are still watching the talk. — Zertrin ^(blabla) 10:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your My Name is Earl question at the reference desk

I found an answer and posted it at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment#Plasticine Catalina. Hope that is what you were looking for. --Gwguffey (talk) 02:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

British toponymy

... and thanks to you for spotting that my first attempt was a bit cryptic! Rjm at sleepers (talk) 10:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Convex uniform polyhedra

Hi Anton. If you're interested in peeking around (I know you have a good eye), I've made my first draft article listing convex uniform polyhedra in the tables like the Uniform polychorons. I'll be here a while: User:Tomruen/temp. There's surely some mistakes, but I think it's near complete. Tom Ruen (talk) 04:00, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the correct language for...

Since you know more about the language of arms, can you tell me how to describe these arems correctly? I have been trying to find the proper language to desribe these coats of arms. Any help that you may offer would be greatly appreciated.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 00:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Glyndwr2.JPG

Banner of Owain IV Glyndŵr

Thank you Very Much! But as you posted that, I had found this description too:

Quarterly Or and Gules, four Lions passant guardant counter-charged langued and armed Azur

and was wondering what 'langued and armed Azur' ment? I suspect armed Azur referenced the blue claws of the Lion.... but what does langued reference if 'passant guardant' reference the position and attitude of the lion?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 18:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found it, but not in Wikipedia. It means toung out, exposed.

"...bare umlaut with 'strikeout' style"

Not my query, Tamfang but may I compliment you on such a nice, clever suggestion! The best workaround I've come up with lately (and not original with me, either) was to use white text on a white background to produce an empty-space appearance where a field has unwanted but obligatory content. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 14:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heraldry Wilkins Arms

Hi Tamfang, I'm LightHorseman1216. I agree with your point about the differencing of those arms, but given that the Wilkins Arms image only had a small caption space, I didn't feel it was appropriate to go into a great amount of detail about how in some cases new arms are chosen based on the arms of individuals or groups whom the new armiger respects or is influenced by. When I have 5 minutes, I'll put something about that in the actual main article. But thanks for the feedback, and I hope you'll have a look at Heraldry in about 24 hours to see if the changes I make are any good.

Cheers LightHorseman1216 (talk) 08:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indents in conversations

Don't feel bad about this; there is no system. As far as I can tell (and I have 3 years experience at Wikipedia, and have been an admin for a year) everyone just automatically indents one more ":" than the post before them, just to make it easier to track where one post ends and another begins. Eventually, if the conversation gets long enough, someone resets the indent. Don't try to follow indents to decide who is responding to who, its not that well organized. Or it might be. There may be other people using other conventions, but no one has told anyone else what those conventions are. You don't have to look for a "code" cuz there isn't one. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:56, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved your Stuarts page

Hello, I am doing a masters thesis on the Stuart succession issue derived from the Act of Settlement 1701 and found your article you had in your sandbox. I took it upon myself to clean up and edit the article and I posted it at Line of succession to the English throne in 1701 for both my own referential purposes and that of others who may be doing similar research. Much thanks for doing the work, I am working on obtaining the referenced book right now through an inter-library loan. I hope that it proves fruitful. If you have any other items that deal with the issue of the 1701 succession, I would very much appreciate it as I still have most of a year to actually turn in the paper. Cheers!
–Darius von Whaleyland, Great Khan of the Barbarian Horde 20:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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, Pretzels^Talk! 15:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changing preferences

I see you use Firefox. I don't but I have now read that it may automatically fill in the "Old password" field, so when you submit the form, it thinks you want to change your password to an empty string. If this happens then clear the "Old password" field before saving preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fibonacci - golden ratio

Re. your question, the fibonacci number page says it this way:

Limit of consecutive quotients

Johannes Kepler observed that the ratio of consecutive Fibonacci numbers converges. He wrote that "as 5 is to 8 so is 8 to 13, practically, and as 8 is to 13, so is 13 to 21 almost”, and concluded that the limit approaches the golden ratio $\varphi \,$ .^[1]

$\lim _{n\to \infty }{\frac {F(n+1)}{F(n)}}=\varphi ,$

This convergence does not depend on the starting values chosen, excluding 0, 0.
Proof:
It follows from the explicit formula that for any real $a\neq 0,\,b\neq 0\,$

${\begin{aligned}\lim _{n\to \infty }{\frac {F_{a,b}(n+1)}{F_{a,b}(n)}}&=\lim _{n\to \infty }{\frac {a\varphi ^{n+1}-b(1-\varphi )^{n+1}}{a\varphi ^{n}-b(1-\varphi )^{n}}}\\&=\lim _{n\to \infty }{\frac {a\varphi -b(1-\varphi )({\frac {1-\varphi }{\varphi }})^{n}}{a-b({\frac {1-\varphi }{\varphi }})^{n}}}\\&=\varphi \end{aligned}}$
because ${\bigl |}{\tfrac {1-\varphi }{\varphi }}{\bigr |}<1$ and thus $\lim _{n\to \infty }\left({\tfrac {1-\varphi }{\varphi }}\right)^{n}=0.$

Then, of course you need to make it clear that the approximation only works higher up in the sequence. For the low numbers one could as well say the "ratio" "approaches" whatever constant one could imagine: "0.5"? "1 : e"?... approaching specifically φ only becomes clear higher up in the range of fibonacci numbers.

Then, what I'm looking for is a normal speach way to express that (without using the specific mathematical expressions involving "limit", "∞" or whatever the casual reader might not be acquainted with).

And no,

The ratios between consecutive numbers of the sequence approach the golden ratio.

doesn't convey that message, because that english sentence can be read as if each ratio of two consecutive fibonacci numbers approaches φ, which is not true. --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Total Recall

Posted response to your April 2007 question at Talk:Mars_Bar#Total_Recall. Better late than never. HairyWombat (talk) 02:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category redirects/mergers should be discussed

I have reverted [2] and posted to Wikipedia:Help desk#Can a Category be redirected?. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there are any more...

Sorry about that. We were in math class, that is when it really started. It was a joke, as Cody was the main kid causing problems, but I will stop.--NicholasHopkinz Talk! 21:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Language game

Good change. It must have been pretty tedious to do all that! —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 00:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keenspot Template

I responded to your discussion on the Keenspot Template. Hopefully that sounds good to you as well.

-- RandorXeus. Remember to Be Bold! 19:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference desk regulars

Hello, Tamfang. I added your signature to this list. I hope that's alright. Happy Holidays! ---Sluzzelin talk 13:37, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jokes

Hi Tamfung: Thanks for your response on the pronunciation of "Holguin". I did get the joke; it was hard to miss with the :P at the end :-). However, I find that, unless I respond "straight" on the Ref Desk, somebody will object. I should have sent a smiley back to you. I understood your answer and also Angr's; I am still not sure what lysdexia's point is, except that she seems to have missed the word "approximation" in Angr's explanation, but doubt that her jargon-filled prose affects the answer to my question. Thanks again. ៛ Bielle (talk) 21:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperbolic honeycombs

Hi Anton,

I finished my hyperbolic-honeycomb tables (I'll recheck tonight on a paper copy). There's 76 forms, some interesting isotopic (identical cells) like the bitruncated p33p regular forms, and omnitruncated cyclic p3p3 forms. Wendy mentioned some non-Wythoffian, but I'm still trying to see if any are compact (finite celled, and vertex figure). I'm hoping Rocchini can make some pictures! Tom Ruen (talk) 19:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Convex_uniform_honeycomb#Hyperbolic_forms

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. flaming lawye r^c 07:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Star polygon

Hi,

I reverted your changes to the star polygon article, because I think they need further discussion - which I started here. Hope you are not offended -- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of Arms proofreading

Hello Tamfang!

I was wondering whether you could help me out by proofreading the description of a Coat of Arms I made while translating the article of a German town to English. The article can be found here. Your help would be very much appreciated, as somehow they neither teached us English heraldry vocabulary at school nor at university. I used the wikipedia heraldry page for a start, but I'm still not sure whether the description is correct.

Thank you very much! --Blutkoete —Preceding undated comment was added on 12:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Old Times

Have you four names? Rowan says hi and hopes you are well. —Tamfang (talk) 03:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I wonder how I missed this before? Anyway, sorry for the delay in answering, and yes, I have four names. I hope both you and Rowan are well as well. I'm married, and our sons just turned 18 and 15. I'd be pleased to further converse in a more private manner if you or she would like. -- Davidkevin (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Duke of Bedford

I am sorry that you have seen fit to revert my addition. This was indented to show that the person concerned was not a Duke (or earl). I use pages such as this one as a disambiguation aid to discover the accepted name form for a peer. This may also be for the peer as an MP before he inherited or as a notable person in other contexts. The object of this is so that I do not create a redlink that some one else may turn into an article, duplicating an existing one. It also allows me to remove redlinks created by others. I have on a few articles inserted into the lists entries (such as for William Russell, Lord Russell) for notable holders of courtesy titles. If I come across a person using such a title, I will search for "Baron Russell". Since it is a subsidiary title of the Dukes, the article on that title redirects to that on the Dukes. However, I would be none the wiser because William Russell does not (or did not) appear there, because it was a courtesy title and he failed to inherit. My addition is that for a purpose, and I propose to reinstate it, but would like your comments first. I do not wnat to engage in an edit war. If you want to discuss this further, I would suggest this conversation be continued on the peerage project page. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Putting such persons in a "see also" section would certainly also work, but I think it a less satisfactory solution. I think this is something that cannot be resolved between the two of us. I have copied the whole correspondence (except this item) to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage, and would suggest that the discussion be continued there. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Convex uniform honeycombs

Hey Anton! Thanks for the proofreading at convex uniform honeycomb, hyperbolic honeycombs. I ran out of steam or eyes to look for typos, and I'm still on low-edit wikbreak on my alternate account, sneaking a bit of work here and there on lunar eclipses lately. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 19:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I'd like to get Wendy's nonwythoffian forms on there at some point, but no real published sources for most, so they just sit for now on my user page: User:Tomruen/hyperbolic_honeycombs#Nonwythoffian_forms SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 20:00, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good point

Thanks. I am always happy to learn new things, be they keyboard shortcuts or uses for gulls. BrainyBabe (talk) 08:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution of Cooperation ...

Thanks, but I just had dump a bunch of edits becasue of a conflict with you jumping in. I am in a process of going through the whole article applying a limited set of consistent changes - how about backing off just a little bit so I can complete this process? J. Johnson (talk) 20:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your edits

Thank you so much for taking the time to edit classical hamiltonian quaternions.

We need good editors like you to clean up the spelling and punctuation. Be warned that some of these old 19th century words don't always show up on spell checkers.

Thanks again, if you have any questions about how to improve a sentence with out changing the meaning just ask!

^ Kepler, Johannes (1966). A New Year Gift: On Hexagonal Snow. Oxford University Press. p. 92. ISBN 0198581203. Strena seu de Nive Sexangula (1611)

[1] Kepler, Johannes (1966). A New Year Gift: On Hexagonal Snow. Oxford University Press. p. 92. ISBN 0198581203. Strena seu de Nive Sexangula (1611)

[1]