User talk:Cmglee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
≤ 2O1O 2O11 2O12 2O13 2O14 2O15 2O16 2O17
Topics started in 2017

Nomination of List of works of fiction by year for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of works of fiction by year is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of works of fiction by year until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -KAP03(Talk • Contributions/Your Page) 23:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

≤ 2O1O 2O11 2O12 2O13 2O14 2O15 2O16 2O17

Hello--would you care to comment for a quote?[edit]

Hi! So as you may know your periodic table img. has been discussed lately and I am working on something for the next Signpost, (scroll down a little) . We would love to hear what you think or any comments we could use there-thank-youTeeVeeed (talk) 00:05, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi TeeVeeed, Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'd clicked "Add a comment" and wrote the following but it doesn't appear (perhaps it's still in draft mode). Cheers, cmɢʟeeτaʟκ 01:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Hello! [1] I'm the illustrator responsible for the infamous periodic table. I was surprised by its selection as NASA Astronomy Picture of the Day and the subsequent criticism of its veracity.[2] I'm no expert in physics and just go by the sources I find – in this case, perhaps a rather questionable one. But isn't "Be Bold" a Wikipedia principle? Instead of being a finished product, I see it as a work to be improved and refined by the community. I'm more than willing to correct the errors, but seeing that different commentators have different thoughts on what the correct version should be, as I'd written on its talk page, 'The question is, "do we have an authoritative source that everyone can agree with?"' I'd like to hear your views! cmɢʟeeτaʟκ 01:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank-you for the reply, and your thoughtful consideration of the matter. JFTR-I agree with you about being bold there. And even if there are errors, having errors is better than having nothing in my opinion, as at least the errors give someone else something to build on or correct. Yes that is the draft page by the way.TeeVeeed (talk) 11:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your work[edit]

File:Comparison_gender_life_expectancy_CIA_factbook.svg is an excellent graph and even nicer with the interactivity. The data is very well presented. Your work is much appreciated. —DIYeditor (talk) 03:47, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi DIYeditor, Many thanks for your kind words. I'm glad you found it useful, and encouraged to make more illustrations! Cheers, cmɢʟeeτaʟκ 21:57, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Age puzzle[edit]

Old tells young guy, "When I was your age, you were x years old. When you become my age, I'll be y years old." How old is each?

Old age = (2y + x) / 3
Young age = (y + 2x) / 3

Disambiguation link notification for April 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Menger sponge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cross-section (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ User:TeeVeeed asked me to comment here
  2. ^ It wasn't me who requested it for consideration – I wasn't even particularly proud of it, as I'd quickly hacked it together after attending a talk showing the figure from which it was derived, and finding that Wikipedia lacked a similar image.