Jump to content

User talk:Dmmaus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 93.173.147.108 (talk) at 12:38, 8 April 2009 (→Heisenberg uncertainty principle: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please add new comments at the bottom. Thanks! Dmmaus.

LBW

LBW - disagree on the half second fact, a ball averaging 82mph from release to pad (allowing 3 ft for each) would take 1/2 second, it's very possible for the ball to take less than that. Bob Palin 00:22, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

D'oh! You're right. I was getting confused in the conversion from mph to metres/second. Given the various speeds of deliveries, however, many can take more than half a second, so I've loosened it up a bit to "around half a second" rather than a blanket "less than half a second". dmmaus 07:34, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Categories

No worries - I'll sort it out! More of a problem is that you need to edit the articles to get them to show up in the categories, but they all need editing anyway because they currently turn up alphabetised by first name not surname (you need to use something like [[Category:X-ian Bowler|Surname, Firstname]]. -- ALoan (Talk) 01:17, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I was wondering why they weren't showing up in the categories after I went and added them all. I thought it was some sort of caching problem. --dmmaus 04:10, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I think there are two effects - it seems to take a while for the cache to catch up anyway, but I think there is a separate problem where articles are given a category before the category exists. If you edit and save without changing the article, all of a sudden it appears in the right categories. I have seen some discussion but can't remember where - may have been Wikipedia:Categorization or Wikipedia talk:Categorization . -- ALoan (Talk) 12:48, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
PS - Many, many thanks, but the way, for taking the time and effort to edit all the cricketer articles to sort out the categorisations. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:59, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Sikh and Muslim names

Thanks for your talkback 'thing'

Well yeah, Okay I understand... thanks for pointing that thing about the Sikh and Muslim name thing out... I probably use got confused because of the other entries (non Sikh and Muslim name) in the List of cricketers like Shane Warne that are in the Last name, First name format like Warne, Shane. Squash

Cricket

I did the images - but I just copied the locations off Nicholas' image - if you two want to debate the positions and send me a sketch of any corrections you think necessary I can change it. Ed g2s 23:04, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Welcome

Gidday, cobber - greetings from across the Ditch! I found you through the list of stubs: New Zealand Cricket. Then I admired your User Page. Then I saw that nobody had formally welcomed you on this page.

So - welcome to WP and I hope you continue to enjoy it.

Noted a few of your contributions: yes, cricket is indeed among them. Caution, maybe, about separate entries for cricket test grounds - some (eg Carisbrook) double as winter-sport grounds and may be already the subject of articles under a slightly different name: integrate rather than duplicating?

Best wishes for tonight's netball. You may see my daughter in the background: she's Arena Manawatu's "Manager Events and Sales" and has been doing 11-hour days recently.

(You're welcome to correct (or write articles for) any dead links in this message; all are from memory or optimism...)

Robin Patterson 01:24, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Cricket images

Yeah, I agree. Gully should be closer to the slips. But what do you mean by behind point? Closer to the slips or deeper? (It shouldn't be deeper, that's my view)

Short mid-wicket, mid-wicket and deep-mid-wicket should be in a straight line (about 330-345° anti-clockwise). I don't have problems with the rotation (slightly up) as you have mentioned.

However, I'm not in favour of eliminating the sweeper position from the image. It should be mentioned if not explicitly. REASON: For the sake of those hearing the position for the first time, or using the image as a reference to learn the game. Nichalp 19:17, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)

I asked Ed to go ahead with the changes. Also asked him to include 6 leg-side additional positions. Nichalp 19:41, Jul 3, 2004 (UTC)

You uploaded Image:CricketSCG1.jpg — it reads that the image is copyrighted by David Morgan-Mar. Is that you? Doesn't saying that copyright conflict with the GDFL that is also marked for that image? —kooo 00:04, 2004 Sep 20 (UTC)

Looks like I was wrong. Please see the image's history page, it's been reverted to include the copyright text. But maybe you should write that the copyright is to yourself (user name), and you allow it to be here? I'm no expert in these matters either. —kooo 06:18, 2004 Sep 20 (UTC)

Talk

Updated the cricket page. Also check your user page for a surprise. [[User:Nichalp|¶ nichalp | Talk]] 20:25, Aug 15, 2004 (UTC)

Affiliate nations

I see you have a neat list of the affiliate and associate nations in you home page. Could you add them to wikipedia? I have already added some of the newest members. [[User:Nichalp|¶ nichalp | Talk]] 20:31, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)

Selected Articles

As you know the page has been nominated to the selected articles. Hope to see your vote there. [[User:Nichalp|¶ nichalp | Talk]] 20:38, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Australian domestic team names

Hi there,

I just made some changes to Cricket Australia regarding state team names. Seeing as you are the only person to have made significant changes to that page, and because you are so prolific on editing cricket related articles, I thought I would point it out to you, so that you could make any corrections.

What do you think of the article names for teams? New South Wales Blues or New South Wales Blues cricket team etc? Not a problem with NSW, but names such as Tasmanian Tigers are almost ambiguous. -- Chuq 04:57, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Hi

Seeing you back after a long long time. We now have four cricket related FA's.  =Nichalp (talk · contribs)= 18:14, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Did you know?

Did you know has been updated
and a fact from the article Palwankar Baloo, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page.

SCG

Hi - just seen your new image of the SCG. Do you think you'd be able to crop the bottom bit out (the bit with the back of people's heads)? I think it'd be a better picture after that. Also, do you have any more piccis? jguk 07:37, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

History of cricket

Hi

Just seen your additions to History of cricket - I'd never seen anything saying cricket had much history before the 1500s, so it's interesting to read the theories. Just wondering if you could add your source as a reference (and also let me know if it's a book worth reading. The Derek Birley book I referenced certainly is - he has an entertaining style, and whilst he occasionally lets his left-wing views take hold, they don't pervade the text. I learnt a lot about English social history in general from it.) jguk 06:18, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ball of the Century

Nice work - congratulations -- Ian ≡ talk 15:30, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Ball of the Century, 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.

Slider

Disagree on removal. Baseball is not better then parachuting. Slider is a meaninful term - even if you are not familiar with it - create disambig, or please put it back.

Thanks - I will do disambig later (or you do).  :) Wanted to add other parachuting equipment entries. DEng 13:45, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject cricket

Hi! I'm inviting you to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket. Hope to see you around there. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:02, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Bombay Triangular / Quadrangular / Pentangular

Oh, well played, sir. <clap clap clap> -- ALoan (Talk) 22:49, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Bombay Quadrangular, 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 Major League Cricket, 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.

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Christmas beetle, 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 15:56, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Beach Cricket Pic

Thanks for the thanks ;). I really love that pic. In fact I think I clicked 3-4 photos, crouched behind the stumps, wanted the ball mid-way... In fact, the ball nearly smashed into my face on one ocassion :D Saish 08:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

esolangs

Hi, I kindly request your input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ook! programming language and User:R. Koot/Esoteric programming languages. Cheers, —Ruud 12:39, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather stay out of any such discussion, as I don't think it is a good idea to contribute when the article is about me or my work. It could be seen as a conflict of interest. -dmmaus 04:57, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I can understand that. I would be interested what you think of my reasoning at User:R. Koot/Esoteric programming languages. If you don't like doing this publicly can contact me by e-mail. Cheers, —Ruud 16:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even though I voted to delete or merge the Ook article, I would like to extend my personal compliments on both your strong ethical code, which is admirable, and the languages themselves, which are fun to read (I just wanted to read about them in 1 place, and not in 20 - but it looks like I am going to be outvoted.) Thanks. GRuban 22:09, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison between cricket and baseball

Ugh! Did you have to pick Enron Field? —The ’Stick 14:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Of course you don't know who I am—I ain’t famous like you! ... I’m not Indian, either; I still should get around to replying to the guy who posted that thing on my talk page, and giggling to him—I had to pick a desi’s brain pretty hard before I finally could add that Kapil Dev interwiki. I was going to mention a slight typo on your cricket explaination page, but it looks like it’s been fixed already—do you ever sleep?? Much luv 07:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on the Mary Sue page

You wrote: 

What the hell?? This used to be a decent article. Now it's been split into a mess spread over two separate and unnecessary articles that waffle on about a single concept and include enormous lists of questionable "examples". This is a severe downgrading of readability and informativeness. I suggest this whole article split be reverted back to how the article was prior to the split and any suggested changes be worked through from there. The main point is that having two articles for what is a single concept makes it difficult to figure out what is going on. It's more useful to discuss differences in definitions of what is a Mary Sue within one article.

And I agreed. I redirected Mary Sue (popular culture) to Mary Sue. It made sense, since almost all of the information was redundant, it really had almost nothing to do with "popular culture" any more than the preexisting Mary Sue article did, and even the information that was no longer redundant was almost entirely wrong; plus, it kept all the worst facets of the older versions of Mary Sue, including the POVish list of "Mary Sues". The original Mary Sue page ended up being expanded to be able to explain both fan fiction and original fiction variations on the concept anyway. There was no real benefit to keeping it up as a seperate page, especially since the concept is easily (and apparently much better) covered in one. Just thought I'd let you know. :) Runa27 23:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

category:History of cricket

Hi. I intend to put a report of my recent and imminent activity in the Wiki Project pages after I've completed a full review of the cricket categories which are frankly a mess. There are at least a couple, especially history of cricket and Test cricket, that are fine messes. I admit responsibility for much of what has gone into history (I think I created it) and so I'm sorting it out by reassigning its specific articles to more relevant or appropriate categories.

The history of cricket category started with the good intention of housing a hierarchy of historical categories and the generic history articles (i.e., not the specific articles). That was when categories were still few and unrelated but the project has outgrown the history category now. A convention has developed whereby specific historical items are mainly held in the cricket by country cats, so I am following that convention.

If we allow a holding category like history of cricket to receive anything and everything that is remotely historical, it is going to end up with a thousand articles in it. Some of the stuff that was in there had simply been dumped and didn't even have a given second category.

Bombay Quadrangular was an Indian event and, in keeping with the established practice of using the cricket by country categories, it should be in Cricket in India (as it is) and I would say it should also be in International Cricket Competitions (so I have just added it to that).

As I say, a report will follow soon. We have far too many high level categories and there are far too many useless lists. I am introducing a structured, top-down approach to categorisation which will make things easy for new and occasional readers. The worst problem is "stray" articles.

Incidentally, my motivation is largely due to people I know who are trying to use WP cricket and who have told me that it is a mess and that it needs a structure. And they are right. All the best. --Jack 04:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for setting me straight on ICC ODI Championship. I can't say that I find "notional" a particularly common word, but obviously it's being used correctly. Woodshed 06:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For your edits on the tassie arts - also my Imac has a problem with Capital q's - appreciate the help on that one. The issue with the pedder art is that the previous edits made it seem as though the damming and re-naming was all allowable and the hydro were in their rights to do what they like  :) For a good encyc art it still needs quite a lot more in it, but you have helped it on its way. Thanks! SatuSuro 11:40, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate any feedback on my attempt to flesh it out a bit, it seems pathetically brief for something which has taken peoples lives away literally and metaphorically SatuSuro 12:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, I noticed that you have over 2500 edits, but you weren't on this list, so I added you. Just letting you know.--Anaraug 09:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bodyline

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket#Bodyline. FYI. Tintin (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you've re-added the unreferenced section tag to the Bodyline article. I'm not quite sure what you want - there are multiple references listed at the bottom of the article. Everything written in that section (and every single other fact that currently has a citation needed tag stuck on it) comes from the book Bodyline Autopsy, which is listed in the references section for the article. Is it really necessary to add explicit citation tags for the exact same book to every statement in the article? It seems redundant and silly to state multiple paragraphs of facts and have a citation tag for the exact same reference stuck on to every single paragraph or sentence. If you have a good way to satisfy your desire for citations without making the article look stupid, please edit the article to add it, as I don't know what will satisfy you. -dmmaus 21:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since I don't have the book, I can't add the references, as I don't have the page numbers. One cite per paragraph should suffice, but opinions attributed to various persons should definitely be cited. Sandy (Talk) 21:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Sandy (Talk) 22:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

I, Dweller award dmmaus a cricket barnstar for excellent, detailed work on Bodyline Dweller 10:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Symmetry and the Sydney Opera House

Hey, I just stumbled across an rather old comment of yours on the Symmetry talk page and I couldn't help but comment. Take a second look at the building the next time you get a chance, preferably from an aerial or top down viewpoint. You'll find that while the building is by no means perfectly symmetric, it does use symmetry in its design. Quite strikingly in fact. 24.50.118.245 04:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

here be dragons

This is about http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Here_be_dragons&diff=114982266&oldid=111647776 i'm asking you to restore it back into article, if you want i can provide you with scans of the here be dragons used on maps in star trek tng. Jernejl 14:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infinity on 30 Credits a Day

The article Infinity on 30 Credits a Day exists (although perhaps not for long) --Stlemur 11:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracy

Hi. I believe there is an inaccuracy in the section of the David Morgan-Mar article about Infinity on 30 Credits A Day. I believe it incorrectly states the process of making the comic.Userboxes Only! 11:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to fix it then. I'm not going to edit a page about me, as I'm hardly a neutral source. -dmmaus 12:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiTrivia

And finally, the official proposal actually needs to be posted at meta:Proposals for new projects. It needs to be done by someone who's willing to take responsibility for the new project (not me, hoping you), so feel free to do that.

01:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Unfortunately I haven't the time or energy to devote to spearheading a formal project proposal. I'm hoping someone picks it up. -dmmaus 11:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CricketBattingAverageHistogram.gif

Any chance you can update the Test bit (only) for Donald Bradman? Thanks! --Dweller (talk) 12:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intriguing! What was the database? --Dweller (talk) 05:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heisenberg uncertainty principle

You've added the Heisenberg uncertainty principle as an example of a "no-go theorem". Since this is a well-researched and thoroughly proven physical phenomenon, I have to wonder why. 93.173.147.108 (talk) 12:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dmmaus&oldid=282541974"