User talk:Verbal

FTN

As I said in my previous message above, I don't mind friend. I'm stepping back from the article and will trust your judgement as a more experienced editor. It appears somebody else has added sources to the Old Souls one anyway, other one still needs improving though Valyard (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ok I didn't see that one. Thanks. Verbal chat 15:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

"Consensus" is not an excuse for edit warring. Quit re-adding the notability tag before you get blocked -- and remember, a technical WP:3RR violation is not necessary for an edit warring block. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:41, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to improve the article, while artw is more interested in removing a valid tag than add sources that show WP:NOTE. I await the sources. Verbal chat 19:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't think I'm being snide, and thanks for taking an interest in the article. Verbal chat 19:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I accept that you are working on improving the article, but that's still not a reason to edit war, mmkay?--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, don't give people 3RR warnings when they've only edited once (4 edits in quick succession = 1 edit for revert-counting purposes).--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we both got mixed up, as a result of my mistake. The warning was for Aspartame controversy and Aspartame, but the tag wouldn't let me put both in. I probably put the wrong one in the headline tag, but editwarring across articles is also not permitted. Verbal chat 13:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see it now -- you probably should have left Aspartame out altogether, since that was only one edit, and it just confused the issue. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was confused, too many tags and mathematica turning my mac into a dog. Verbal chat 14:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you mean a dogcow? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:16, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Carol Bowman; Sussex House School; Reincarnation (song); Colin Fry; Physical strength; Merisant; Satwant Pasricha; Umesh Vazirani; Reincarnation (Ismailism); David R. Hawkins; Inouwa; Bachelor of Computer Science; Connor Cruise; Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore; Computational economics; Intelligent haunting; Lifetimes True Accounts of Reincarnation; Sylvia Cranston; Residual haunting

Cleanup: Paranormal television; Andy Tomlinson; AIDS
Merge: Homeopathy and allopathy; Economy of West Virginia; Affirmations (New Age)
Add Sources: Jurgen Ziewe; Yonassan Gershom; C. T. K. Chari
Wikify: Sweet corn; Imran Garda; Health care in Turkey
Expand: Conium; The National Council Against Health Fraud; Paranormal fiction

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

language editions

Why were the list of language editions removed from Arnold Ehret? Zanze123 (talk) 18:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't forget 1RR.

Please don’t forget that per GeorgeWilliamHerbert’s comment at AN/I, the talk page FAQ for race and intelligence is under 1RR also. You’ve already reverted it once, by blanking the content from the mediation that Ludwigs2 added in April; your edit essentially reverts the FAQ back eleven months. I’ve also reverted the article once by undoing this change, so neither of us can revert it again in the next day without violating the 1-revert restriction. If you think blanking this portion of the FAQ is necessary, you’ll need to discuss it on the article talk page or the arbitration workshop page and seek consensus for this change there, rather than just reverting it again. --Captain Occam (talk) 05:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was an edit, not a revert. Please stop wikilawyering, you're not very good at it. Verbal chat 09:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note from TickleMeister

[[Image:Information.svg|25px|]] I noticed the message you recently left to Talk:Aspartame controversy. Please remember: do not bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Thank you. Also stop harassing me on my user talk page TickleMeister (talk) 11:31, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Polite requests are not harassment, but I will refrain from posting there if you wish. I have been attempting to follow WP:DR. Verbal chat 11:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

cough

Hi, cough is my magic word for making edits go away that I don't feel are constructive on my talkpage, after I have read them of cource. I dislike all that linking to agf and wp civil and such, I know were they all are and I don't need linking to them. The other issue was the claim that I reverted anything with a misleading edit summary on the article...I did not touch the content . I just did a blind edit in an attempt to stop the reverting, I didn't touch the content just added a full stop. I also didn't name anyone about tag teaming and it was just a general comment not pointed at anyone. It was again just another nudge towards discussion and consensus. I do appreciate your comments on my talkpage as to going forward and I am very happy to go forward in that vein as in fresh start, yes. Cool. ok. Feel free to remove this once you have read it. I also have other issues at the moment regarding my user name as it is now common knowledge to business associates and I am actually considering migration and I know wiki users understand the jargon but since the issue came up I am reading and removing dispute type comments. Your comments are appreciated, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 18:46, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What claim about a misleading edit? Verbal chat 18:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit summary I think you meant) Please do not make accusations of tag teaming, it is not WP:CIVIL and does not assume good faith. I note that your revert does not contain a valid rationale either. User;Verbaldiff

No worries, just it wasn't a revert. perhaps I should have added.. This one (blind edit) Please move to discussion on the talkpage... anyway lets forget about it and as you suggest, start afresh in a spirit of friendly good will, yes, cool. Off2riorob (talk) 19:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, apologies. Thanks! Verbal chat 19:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any more objections to D-Wave Systems addition?

The chip photo has been verified, so is there anything else you'd like changed before an addition is made? The current proposed text to be added in a Technology Description section reads as:

As of June 2010, it has been published that a D-Wave processor comprises a programmable^[1] superconducting integrated circuit with up to 128 pair-wise coupled^[2] superconducting flux qubits^[3]^[4]^[5]. The processor is designed to implement a special-purpose adiabatic quantum optimization algorithm^[6]^[7] as opposed to being operated as a universal gate-model quantum computer.

As a caption for the photo, would the file description on its page now suffice? Please let me know what you think. Ndickson (talk) 20:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^ M. W. Johnson et al., "A scalable control system for a superconducting adiabatic quantum optimization processor," Supercond. Sci. Technol. 23, 065004 (2010); preprint available: arXiv:0907.3757
^ R. Harris et al., "Compound Josephson-junction coupler for flux qubits with minimal crosstalk," Phys. Rev. B 80, 052506 (2009); preprint available: arXiv:0904.3784
^ R. Harris et al., "Experimental demonstration of a robust and scalable flux qubit," Phys. Rev. B 81, 134510 (2010); preprint available: arXiv:0909.4321
^ Next Big Future: Robust and Scalable Flux Qubit, [1], September 23, 2009
^ Next Big Future: Dwave Systems Adiabatic Quantum Computer [2], October 23, 2009
^ Edward Farhi et al., "A Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithm Applied to Random Instances of an NP-Complete Problem," Science 92, 5516, p.472 (2001)
^ Next Big Future: Dwave Publishes Experiments Consistents with Quantum Computing and Support Claim of At Least Quantum Annealing, [3], April 09, 2010

[1] M. W. Johnson et al., "A scalable control system for a superconducting adiabatic quantum optimization processor," Supercond. Sci. Technol. 23, 065004 (2010); preprint available: arXiv:0907.3757

[2] R. Harris et al., "Compound Josephson-junction coupler for flux qubits with minimal crosstalk," Phys. Rev. B 80, 052506 (2009); preprint available: arXiv:0904.3784

[3] R. Harris et al., "Experimental demonstration of a robust and scalable flux qubit," Phys. Rev. B 81, 134510 (2010); preprint available: arXiv:0909.4321

[4] Next Big Future: Robust and Scalable Flux Qubit, [1], September 23, 2009

[5] Next Big Future: Dwave Systems Adiabatic Quantum Computer [2], October 23, 2009

[6] Edward Farhi et al., "A Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithm Applied to Random Instances of an NP-Complete Problem," Science 92, 5516, p.472 (2001)

[7] Next Big Future: Dwave Publishes Experiments Consistents with Quantum Computing and Support Claim of At Least Quantum Annealing, [3], April 09, 2010

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]