Jump to content

User talk:Verbal

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ndickson (talk | contribs) at 21:30, 23 June 2010 (→‎Any more objections to D-Wave Systems addition?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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]

Certainly looks a lot better now, although I'd remove the bold ;) Verbal chat 09:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
lol, yeah, it'd be pretty confusing to have random sentences made bold in the middle of articles. Thanks for the help editing! :) Ndickson (talk) 21:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  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
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Verbal&oldid=369808914"