User talk:Chris troutman
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any threads with no replies in 30 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
August 30, 2016
|First Edit Day
- 1 02:09:34, 18 July 2016 review of submission by NNcNannara
- 2 Draft:Proof of Binomial Theorem Utilizing Taylor's Series
- 3 Told you so
- 4 2016 Australian Census
- 5 Again, what the fuck?
- 6 re: Missing
- 7 Talkback
- 8 Username policy
- 9 Proposal: New Page Reviewer user right
- 10 Backlog
- 11 Autopatrolled granted
- 12 Telegram
02:09:34, 18 July 2016 review of submission by NNcNannara
Why is the pseudo code and explanation on the main AVL page 'suitable' and this beautiful C# code with explanation 'unsuitable'.
As I pointed out to Roger, I have many more pages that I could add, but if this one doesn't make it, neither will they.
Clearly I am wasting my time with Wikipedia. I'll not waste any more time though.
Draft:Proof of Binomial Theorem Utilizing Taylor's Series
This comment is in reference to the articleDraft: Proof of the Binomial Theorem utilizing Taylor's Series. Rejecting this article will add to the ignorance of the fact that the proof of the Binomial theorem can be achieved by performing the Taylor's expansion of a binomial expression. The proof utilizing the Taylor expansion obviates the need to invoke mathematical induction and reference to Pascal's triangle. I thought is was a goal of an Encyclopedia to propagate knowledge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:204:CA02:6170:E871:76AE:1916:99EA (talk) 04:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Told you so
But you had to go ahead and take your bite at the apple immediately anyway. Admittedly, I was completely wrong about the AfD turning into an epic politard fustercluck, but a "snow keep" was the next most likely outcome, and "keep" would have been the result either way.
Next time an editor with as many battle scars as I have offers you unsolicited advice about when it might be better to be patient rather than simply running headlong into the ramparts, listen. -- Kendrick7talk 01:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I must be doing something right if I'm being "harassed" . But, I don't think I have ever edited that Census page, so I can't see why I was brought into it by 'that' editor. --220 of Borg 07:50, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- @220 of Borg: I used to work at the VA, working with homeless folks. We were told to expect that some would be "responding to internal stimuli" so your own actions might not be what's provoking activity. I think that's what you might be seeing here. Chris Troutman (talk) 08:23, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Again, what the fuck?
Chris, this is in no way, shape, or form appropriate in any universe I'm familiar with. Kevin is now dead. An obituary is not the place to air your grievances. If you restore it again, I will block you. This is the second time I've come here with similar concerns. Have you no empathy? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- @The ed17: Spare me your sanctimony. No, I have none of this misplaced empathy with which you apparently suffer. While I can understand the editor of a newspaper not publishing a "letter to the editor" from a guy like me, I'm somewhat concerned with the apparent WP:OWNership you feel towards talk pages outside your own talk. I don't suppose you have a policy-based argument for your reversion?
- To make matters worse, you threaten to block me. How? Can you claim my "conduct severely disrupts the project" through "gross incivility"? I made no personal attack, just stating fact. I recommend you re-read WP:WHYBLOCK. This is the first time an admin has made such a threat towards me and I don't take it lightly. You can disagree if you like and condemn me, but making unilateral threats out of process is something else. You censor me in the same Signpost issue you're complaining about the WMF censoring you. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:27, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Andonic: I added a hidden comment on that page to warn Wikipedians not to add your name. Sorry for the inconvenience. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:59, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chris, while Emir of Wikipedia is rather suspiciously experienced for a one-month account, the name does not violate the username policy unless there's a clause there that I'm not aware of. I'm assuming you left the notice after glancing at the "misleading" section there, but this applies only to named on-wiki positions like "administrator" or "bureaucrat." Best, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:26, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
- @The ed17: Per WP:TPO, you shall not refractor my comments. If you disagree about my interpretation of WP:IU, you are welcome to make your own comment. This is the second time you've edited a warning I've posted to a user talk page in good faith and I do not appreciate it. I generally don't want to hear from you ever again for any reason. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Proposal: New Page Reviewer user right
A discussion is taking place to request that New Page Patrollers be suitably experienced for patrolling new pages. Your comments at New pages patrol/RfC for patroller right are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:41, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
The NPP backlog now stands at 13,158 total unreviewed pages.
Just to recap:
- 13 July 2016: 7,000
- 1 August 2016: 9,000
- 7 August 2016: 10,472
- 16 August 2016: 11,500
- 28 August 2016: 13,158
You naturally don't have to feel obliged, but if there's anything you can do it would be most appreciated. I've spent 40 hours on it this week but it's only a drop in the ocean.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:41, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Chris troutman, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~ Rob13Talk 06:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)