User talk:Chrislintott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Signpost
6 September 2017


Peer reviews having minimal or no feedback at all:
August 10Children of Llullaillaco
June 28Rotating locomotion in living systems
June 142014 Champions Professional Indoor Football League season
If your review is not present in the main unanswered list, add it here.
view listupdate

Archives[edit]

1,2

Croke park[edit]

[1]

Thank you, please cite it! Meanwhile im reverting your edit.

Your name...[edit]

Is the name "Lintott" taken? In Sweden "lintott" is something you call children with blonde hair. It comes from "lin" (flax) and "tott" (not sure, but I think it's something like "tuft" as in "a bunch of"). // Liftarn

The existence of black holes[edit]

My edits are to ensure that a layman reading the article will not jump to conclusions about black holes. They are regarded as theory, and their existence has yet to be proven. The unproven mathematics are another large part of why their existence hasn't been verified yet. Hawking himself declared that some of his ideas about the theory to be wrong.

Black holes continue to be the popularly "accepted" explanation, but their existence is far from proven. The theory can be tweaked to match observational data, which in result may "indicate" that the theory is true, even if it is no closer to being proven than before. My intent is simply to encourage critical thinking, and not to not allow people to jump to conclusions without knowing all the facts.


Thanks for the link. I will have to read through and see what I can make of it. I am not a professional scientist of any sort, all I have is my mind and an interest in the field.

Thanks also for not reverting my edits. I am, as much as possible, trying to maintain a NPOV. ~ste

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Chrislintott. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

Wikipedia decision making[edit]

(In response to Special:Diff/753215271/753320081) Our basic decision procedure is discussion until WP:CONSENSUS is established. WP:Policies and guidelines document our prior discussions, so that is the first stop when not sure. Nothing wrong with asking first, but one of our guidelines is WP:BOLD, so going ahead is fine, too. If someone objects, discussion begins. If something is unclear, feel free to ask anyone, including me. I'm only a minor contributor, but I've been around long enough to know how to find the right wizards in this asylum. ;) Paradoctor (talk) 15:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

P.S.: Never forget WP:IAR. WP:WIARM provides some exposition. Paradoctor (talk) 16:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - I've been around a long while, so know the basics. A reminder is always appreciated though. Chrislintott (talk) 10:53, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, Popups showed just 700+ edits and I then kind of assumed you were as raw as I was at that count. Face-tongue.svg Just saw your user page. Oops. This post never happened. Happy editing. Paradoctor (talk) 16:28, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
That's ok - sorry for my slightly grumpy reply! It's a good reminder to do more. I've now added a note to the article's talk page suggesting a move - is there anything else I should do? Otherwise I shall be WP:BOLD and move if no discussion ensues. Chrislintott (talk) 11:14, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
If that was you being grumpy, you should work for the UN. Face-grin.svg
I suggest waiting a week or so after the last substantial comment to your proposal, it gives the less active editors a chance to get involved. Not expecting serious opposition, but I've been known to be in error before. :P Paradoctor (talk) 20:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)