User talk:Jorfer

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 17:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger Zo/Zou/Zomi

Thanks for your comment at Talk:Zo (people)#Proposed merger Zo/Zou. Unfortunately, Khumpita is not a current contributor, so we will have to work without any of his additional insights. The anthropological literature may be useful in merging the articles. What do you think of calling them Zomi? Ideas, suggestions? --Bejnar (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Largest buildings and largest domes

Hi, just to let you know, I started a discussion here regarding your re-additions to Template:TBSW. Cheers, timsdad ^(talk) 00:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Emissions Fees vs. Cap and Trade

I was very disappointed to see that you removed my (previously anonymous) edit regarding the relation between cap and trade and taxes. Your comment that they are only equivalent in theory, not in practice, is false; there always exists an emissions fee that would have the same economic effects, though in the presence of uncertainty, it may not be the fee you had anticipated. For an introductory sentence, I thought that that would be too complex. I get this, not only from the cited textbook itself, but also personal communications with its author, Harvey Rosen, who used this subtle but very important fact in practice while serving as the Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers in 2005.

I meant that addition to be apolitical; from an economics standpoint, it's simply one of the most fundamental things to realize about a cap and trade system.

I am putting together a longer section, detailing the proof of why this is true, as well as a discussion of how uncertainty affects things. I was shocked to see this not already on the page.

Achilles1212 (talk) 01:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but see, that's the crux of the issue. You imply that we need to cap at a certain value for all of time. In fact, the appropriate cap changes just as much as the price of the permit does (or the appropriate value of a tax). The appropriate cap (and the appropriate tax value) is determined by when the marginal cost to society of reducing output by one more unit of pollution outweighs the marginal benefit of society of that reduction. This can be represented as the intersection of the marginal cost and marginal benefits curves. Anything that changes these curves (such as a deterioration in economic confidence) changes both the appropriate price (or tax) and the appropriate cap. Thus, to do a proper job and make sure that you maximize the net benefits to society, one would have to constantly adjust the cap in a cap and trade or the tax in an emissions fee system. I'll discuss this in much more detail with graphs and equations in my section.

Achilles1212 (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me how anything I've said is normative. I don't believe that a cap-and-trade system or a tax system is better. They are each appropriate for different issues. It's all determined by the shapes of the marginal costs and marginal benefits curve. You are correct in saying that Congress could never implement a changing marginal tax rate. Neither could they implement a changing cap. Unfortunately, the appropriate value (tax or cap) will change, so one has to pick the system that will keep emission levels closer to the new societal optimum. This is where uncertainty comes in and you have to give your best guess. Sometimes the optimum quantity of reduction will vary a lot, while the optimum price of reduction will not; here it's better to guess the price to society and implement a tax. Other times, the price will vary a lot while the optimum quantity stays fairly fixed; here it is better to guess the desired quantity and set a cap. So while a cap-and-trade system could be appropriate for carbon, a tax system may be appropriate for sulfur (I don't know which is better for which; people spend their lives doing just these calculations). This is a completely positive statement; one or the other will get you closer to the optimal situation.

That said, at any one moment in time, there is a definite price to buying a permit to produce one unit of pollution in a cap-and-trade system. If, at the moment, one were to replace the cap-and-trade system with a tax per unit equal to the price of a permit, then absolutely nothing would change. All companies would still clean up the same amount. As time goes forward in the two scenarios, things would be different as conditions change. Nevertheless, there always exists a cap that would have the same effect as a given tax at a single moment in time, and there always exists a tax that would have the same effect as a cap. In a cap-and-trade system, the tax value changes all the time. In a tax system, the cap changes all the time.

Achilles1212 (talk) 22:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Galleries

Wikipedia:IG#Image_galleries. Please reply here if you're going to. - Denimadept (talk) 00:15, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well then keep the historical photos, add some more from User:Jorfer/Sandbox3, and call it history in pictures or something like that. There is no reason to remove the gallery altogether.--Jorfer (talk) 00:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They're all historical. Everything is historical. I only removed the gallery, not the pictures integrated with the article. - Denimadept (talk) 09:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I mean those that capture a one-time event in the bridges history. Not all the valuable historical images can fit within the article.--Jorfer (talk) 14:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the gallery should go. It's just a random bunch of pictures. People can get that from the Commons link. - Denimadept (talk) 15:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?

Do you know who is doing it? Why were you singled out for this? - Denimadept (talk) 23:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

South Florida

I've responded on my talk page and commented on the article talk page. -- Donald Albury 10:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody thinks your new photo was more appropriate

That new photo that was there on your profile yesterday was very appropriate. I understand you didn't like it much, but Wikipedia is not about your likings. Wiki userpages are meant to reveal the editor to the world, so that photo was very proper. I request you to revert it back in true Wiki Spirit. Antihijacker (talk) 13:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly note

Regarding your edits to metric expansion of space, you cannot simply remove a formatting to a important piece of information especially if it is potentially controversial. All information in these entries must be formatted and presented properly H:E. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Antihijacker (talk) 13:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice

I blocked Antihijacker for harassment, and asked for a review here. -- Donald Albury 17:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might be amused

...by User talk:Denimadept#The answer to your question. - Denimadept (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Health care in the United States

I still think this study is not important and relevant enough to be included the the WP:LEAD and have removed it.Scientus (talk) 23:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AutoEd bug

Thanks for the bug report. It should now be fixed. That particular links module has caused problems in the past and I have been meaning to rewrite it. Now I have a good reason to rewrite it. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cost-shifting

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Cost-shifting, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. UltraMagnus (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Cost-shifting

I have nominated Cost-shifting, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cost-shifting. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. UltraMagnus (talk) 08:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Carter

Hiya Jorfer. Please note that Democratic Presidential Nominee is not an office & therefore doesn't belong in the articles Infobox. None of the Presidential & Vice Presidential biography articles has these in their Infoboxes. Please don't re-add it. GoodDay (talk) 22:08, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another reason: Can you imagine 'how long' the Infoboxes would be at Franklin D. Roosevelt & Richard Nixon, if one added the 5 times the've been on the Democratic & Republican tickets respectively? GoodDay (talk) 22:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Sorry for my slightly loud 'edit summary' at the Carter article. GoodDay (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know how to request a user block ?

Hi Jorfer,

Once again I've received personal insults and attacks by a member who seems to think this is fine. His user talk page is just rife with people telling him to stop with the insults and disparaging comments. The only thing I can think to do is to request he be blocked, and I'm not sure why he hasn't been in the past after looking at the numerous individuals commenting on this problem on his own talk page. Although I found information on what a user block is, I can't seem to find any info on how to actually request a user block, which at this point I think is warranted. If you know how to request a block, I'd appreciate the info. Thanks...
Howaboutyouthinkaboutit (talk) 09:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Street Art

Hello, Jorfer. Please see the Street Art talk page. If you could clarify the reason for reversion, that'd be great. Thanks! GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proving a negative

Actually I can justify that the bills contain these articles. I gave the paragraph numbers for each reported bill. If you need the links they are easy to find with a Google search or from the relevant WP articles for each bill. You are being a bit of a naughty naughty editor for sowing needless doubt into the minds of WP readers. People might think you had an ulterior motive. And we wouldn't want that, surely.--Hauskalainen (talk) 00:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:11-26-06 1535.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:11-26-06 1535.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILY_sock ^(TALK) 01:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TBSW

Hello, Jorfer. You have new messages at Template talk:TBSW.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cease and Desist

Stop deleting my contributions. Now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Registry Editor (talk • contribs) 15:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Randall-Reilly Publishing Co., LLC

The article Randall-Reilly Publishing Co., LLC has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable company. See the relevant notability guideline.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bfigura ^(talk) 16:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

images on essay

Hi, I relocated the "students doing research in library" photo to the "As a pedagogical tool" section. I didn't meean to imply by putting it in the lede that only students do essays. I appreciate your concerns about the appropriateness of photos. Interestingly, WP:Images says that you are allowed to illustrate abstract concepts with pictures. The example they give is that you could illustrate "social inequality" with a photo of a poor person standing near an expensive car. Now "essay" is not an abstract concept like "social inequality"...you could have a photo of an essay. It's just that, well...a photo of an essay wouldn't look very interesting. It would be a piece of paper with typing on it :)............... as such, I was trying to think of a way of illustrating the process of writing an essay. I guess another way to illustrate "essay" is with photos or paintings of famous essayists. What do you think?OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 20:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bells are ringing

Do you have Tinnitus yet from wearing those ear phones?173.61.94.34 (talk) 21:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

They are earmuffs and no.--Jorfer (talk) 16:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited!

Wikipedia:Meetup/Miami 3 is coming up in the near future, you are invited to participate. Thanks Secret ^account 17:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes

It has disturbed me to discover that the majority of the population do not seem to understand what a direct quote is. I share your bemusement. Pdfpdf (talk) 10:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such word as "alumnist"

It should also be pointed out that an alumnus is someone who formerly attended a school. Thus, if I formerly attended Dade Christian, I would be an alumnus thereof. (And if my daughter had attended it, she would be an alumna [Latin is like that].) --Orange Mike | Talk 19:09, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Jennifer Wilson (reality show contestant)

I have nominated Jennifer Wilson (reality show contestant), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Wilson (reality show contestant). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Shadowjams (talk) 03:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mickey Mouse

I believed that my image would be public domain as taken in Japan, since AFAIK product display cases aren't copyrighted, and also there are multiple packages displayed, and the focus is on two products.

There is a trademark with Disney, and that is indicated. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ache

I assume so, yuss. Ironholds (talk) 02:55, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cropped image of war memorial

I noticed a recent edit and upload of yours and have reverted your edit and started a discussion thread here. Would you be able to comment there? Carcharoth (talk) 01:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented further there and on Commons (I left a message on your Commons talk page, but not sure how often you check that). Carcharoth (talk) 03:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Korean War Memorial Picture Transfer

Hi. It's my understanding that the German Wikipedia allows locally pictures of buildings and sculptures standing in public places, even though the country there standing in doesn't recognize FoP. You may be able to get more information from User:Chaddy, who requested the transfer of those pictures to de: Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:08, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Euthanasia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grades

Why do you list your Art as Experience and Issues in Economics grades on your profile? Do you post them on your door in your dorm too? It's weird. Otherwise, keep up the good work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.82.142 (talk) 12:30, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deal with economics issues on Wikipedia sometimes. It demonstrates my credentials. My Art as Experience grade could be useful to have on there in the future in the same way.--Jorfer (talk) 20:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gerrymandering

Why have you reverted my edit to Gerrymandering, calling it POV? An upcoming boundary review of UK Parliamentary constituencies was listed as an example of gerrymandering. The citation given is from an opposition politician (Jack Straw) calling it so. But just because Straw, or in fact any politician, says something is "gerrymandering", that doesn't make it true. In fact, as I said in my edit comment, the UK has an independent Electoral Commission, so it is hard to see exactly how gerrymandering could take place. But regardless, unless there's a neutral source calling the boundary review "gerrymandering", I see no reason why it should be listed as an example, and that's why I deleted that section.

And I guess by calling my edit POV, you are implying that I am supportive of the UK coalition government in some way. For what it's worth, I am not.