User talk:Brews ohare: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎WP:AE#Request concerning Brews ohare: Fix wording of my comment
Brews ohare (talk | contribs)
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 97: Line 97:
Here we go again. Since you can't help but violate your topic ban, I've requested that you get blocked for the rest of it. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|contribs]] / [[WP:PHYS|physics]] / [[WP:WBOOKS|books]]}</span> 01:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Here we go again. Since you can't help but violate your topic ban, I've requested that you get blocked for the rest of it. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|contribs]] / [[WP:PHYS|physics]] / [[WP:WBOOKS|books]]}</span> 01:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:Please see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=396243741&oldid=396242870 my closure] of this enforcement request, and let me know if you have any further comments. My conclusion is that you have agreed to make no more than one revert per article per week on anything in the natural sciences. In my mind, that includes mathematics. Your binding-voluntary ban expires at the same time as your topic ban from physics, that is, 22 August 2011. We have agreed to your stipulation that you may be blocked up to one week each time we decide that the new ban is violated. Thank you, [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 18:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
:Please see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=396243741&oldid=396242870 my closure] of this enforcement request, and let me know if you have any further comments. My conclusion is that you have agreed to make no more than one revert per article per week on anything in the natural sciences. In my mind, that includes mathematics. Your binding-voluntary ban expires at the same time as your topic ban from physics, that is, 22 August 2011. We have agreed to your stipulation that you may be blocked up to one week each time we decide that the new ban is violated. Thank you, [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 18:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
::EdJohnston: Regardless of your personal definition of "natural sciences", they do not include mathematics according to the everyday understanding of this term. See [http://books.google.com/books?id=YgmDjp9OAPMC&pg=PA2054&dq=mathematics+%22natural+sciences%22&hl=en&ei=lLLgTMTWLJSksQPtlJmLCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=mathematics%20%22natural%20sciences%22&f=false here]. The "natural sciences" are empirical in nature; mathematics is not. [[User:Brews ohare|Brews ohare]] ([[User talk:Brews ohare#top|talk]]) 15:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
::Obviously, my voluntary restriction was volunteered on the basis of the common interpretation of ordinary English. [[User:Brews ohare|Brews ohare]] ([[User talk:Brews ohare#top|talk]]) 16:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:08, 15 November 2010

On improving the editing climate

“I am not a champion of lost causes, but of causes not yet won.” Norman Thomas, quoted by Justice Sotomayor
“Substantial unanswered questions are raised when men seek ... solutions which are not based on real conditions.” RA Chikota & MC Moran


“Increased democratic deliberation, based upon rewarding good political judgment ... harnesses the contest among ambitious leaders to the necessity of giving good advice” --- Peter Breiner Max Weber & democratic politics


►      …      ♫       …       ◄     

Tar babies

Br'er Rabbit meets the tar baby; an encounter with enforcement.

Arbitration ‘hearings’ are tar babies. Once you attract administrators' attention, residual attacks and arbitration follow you 'round like gnats in the Quebec woods.

Great to have you back!

Hey Brews. I just noticed you'd returned to editing and wanted to let you know that it's great having you back. I was never too clear on exactly what the ArbCom drama was all about and didn't want to interfere, but I'm glad that it's finally over. Anyway, hope you weren't too discouraged and that we'll be able to work on some articles again in the future. -Roger (talk) 20:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How's it Hanging Brews?

Hey I was checking out the Citzendieum started by Larry Sanger. I'm not suggesting you leave wikipedia or anything of the sort but the way that site is set up with your credentials I think you would make a excellent addition to their Editor ranks. They require you to be a expert but you would have a part in reviewing submitted content and making sure it is correct. Not advocating for you, just figured to point out that you could also contribute there with your qualifications. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back to physics!

Welcome back to physics!
Count Iblis (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merci

Merci pour la reconnaissance :) Dr.K. λogosπraxis 22:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstars3

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
In recognition of your inspirational, tireless and enthusiastic contributions in many diverse areas of Wikipedia. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 06:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
In recognition of your many fine, tasteful and meticulous technical drawings which illuminate and illustrate so many scientific concepts. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 06:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Technology Barnstar
For your excellent contributions to science articles. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 06:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, they are well deserved. Brews ohare, please learn Portuguese and start editing in the Portuguese Wikipedia, because unlike here, there you will be welcome! AmigoDoPaulo (talk) 14:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needed image

Hi Brews ohare! I need an image representing a positive feedback system (dual to your image about negative feedback, simply with "plus" instead the "minus" of the lower summer input). I would like to use it in positive feedback, Schmitt trigger and flip-flop pages. I also need an image representing 100% negative feedback system (without β in the feedback loop) to place it in emitter follower and voltage follower. Also, do you have any idea how to recreate this image using vector graphics as an SVG file? I have already installed Inkscape but I don't know how to open an existing image to edit it. Would you help me? Regards, Circuit dreamer (talk, contribs, email) 06:54, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Circuit dreamer: My approach has been to use Microsoft Excel to draw the image and save it as a png or jpg file in Microsoft paint. For example, you possible can load the existing diagram and simply block out labels you don't want and re-save the file on WP commons using a new file name. I haven't learned how to do SVG, and haven't used Inkscape. I'd be happy to hear your advice about these tools. Brews ohare (talk) 14:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the responsiveness. Today I started working with Inkscape. I noted that if I right-click directly the image in the page, I can save it only as png or bitmap. But if I left-click it, then go to its page and left-click the link below the image, I can save it as svg and then to open it with Inkscape. I tried also to convert your bitmap image into curves using trace bitmap options of the program. But I haven't managed to select a separate object to duplicate or to delete it. Obviously, there is a lot to learn... Regards, Circuit dreamer (talk, contribs, email) 17:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_06_04.html http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.4704v1.pdf http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0704/0704.0646v2.pdf http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/cond-mat/pdf/0404/0404617v2.pdf

Here we go again. Since you can't help but violate your topic ban, I've requested that you get blocked for the rest of it. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my closure of this enforcement request, and let me know if you have any further comments. My conclusion is that you have agreed to make no more than one revert per article per week on anything in the natural sciences. In my mind, that includes mathematics. Your binding-voluntary ban expires at the same time as your topic ban from physics, that is, 22 August 2011. We have agreed to your stipulation that you may be blocked up to one week each time we decide that the new ban is violated. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
EdJohnston: Regardless of your personal definition of "natural sciences", they do not include mathematics according to the everyday understanding of this term. See here. The "natural sciences" are empirical in nature; mathematics is not. Brews ohare (talk) 15:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, my voluntary restriction was volunteered on the basis of the common interpretation of ordinary English. Brews ohare (talk) 16:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]