User talk:Jeh
jeh
|
 | I would prefer that you not use this page to complain about, argue against, etc., my edits. You can of course thank me for them here if you want! But per WP:TALK, any discussion (argument, debate, dispute, whatever) over article content belongs on that article's talk page, not here. That way, other interested editors can see the discussion and participate. (Who knows? Consensus might go against me! But if nobody else sees the discussion, that can't happen.) Thank you for understanding. |
 |
|
Zorin
I just got some new information about Zorin, check if it is true or not ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.211.7.61 (talk) 15:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
- As it says in the box at the top of my talk page, and also in the bright green box you must have seen when you edited this page, discussion of article content belongs at that article's talk page. Not on any user's talk page. Jeh (talk) 15:10, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Dávid Forgács
Hello Jeh. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dávid Forgács, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not sure the status of A.C. Pisa 1909, but this likely should be ran through AFD. . Thank you. Courcelles (talk) 23:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
- Very well. Its creation was one of several problematic acts by a new editor. I'll tag it for improvement. Jeh (talk) 23:15, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
As to the talk page of x86-64 and PAE
After reading your words on talk pages of x86-64 and PAE, I wish you simply understand what other people talk about, rather than shut up their months with your sock puppet policy. We do not want to make other mistake that you are the leader of Wikipedia.org, and we do not want any negative effect on Wikipedia.org because of your works. Thank you. 221.9.21.69 (talk) 03:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- Socks don't get to express their opinions. Not on article talk pages, not on my talk page either. Jeh (talk) 03:52, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
| “ | Even though the 64-bit processor (even with only 48 bits of v.a. implemented) certainly has enough address bits to address all of RAM in any practical configuration, that does not address, for example, the need for multiple processes to re-instantiate the address space. | ” |
So I wish you not make ridiculous things to fool around! You correct-taken head should make you understand what others really talk about! Do please try to go a further step to hear what others really talk about! Thank you! 221.9.21.69 (talk) 03:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Sourcing
| “ | I am a moderately well known consultant and seminar leader in the field of Windows device drivers, debugging, and general kernel mode development. I've been working with Windows NT device drivers since the October '92 Driver Developer's Conference. For a few years after that I was a prolific contributor to the Windows NT device driver newsgroups, and that work earned me an MS MVP (NT DDK) award for a few years, but the consulting/training business has taken too much of my time lately to continue those efforts. (And Microsoft decided that they would no longer have MVPs for driver development!)
Prior to my work involvement with the Windows NT family I worked for many years in similar areas of DEC's VMS operating system. While working for a DEC IHV/ISV I was responsible for the device drivers for a line of intelligent programmable front-end communications interfaces... some of which I later learned were still in use years later in Operation Desert Storm. I won several awards for various contributions to the DEC User's Society. Before VMS I worked principally with HP's DOS-M, RTE-M, and 2000F operating systems. These ran on 16-bit minicomputers, the HP 2100 and 1000MX, classic load-and-store machines like many of the minis before the PDP-11. I also put in some time on the HP 3000 under MPE, and PDP-11's under RSTE/E and RSX-11/M. MCTS for Windows Internals, for what that's worth. And General class ham operator. |
” |
Definitively, we need sources about words you said after you've exposed your comprehension on PAE and x86-64! 221.9.21.69 (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)