User talk:Jorge Stolfi/JUNK-1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 01 | Archive 2

Hi there

Hi there. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions on digital imaging. If you want, drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log to introduce yourself.

If you need editing help, visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page. For format questions, visit our manual of style. You can use the Show preview button before you save, to make sure your edits do what you intended.

You can sign your name on talk pages by using " ~~~ " for your username and " ~~~~ " for your username and a timestamp.

Some time when you're bored, you can read through our policies and guidelines. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.

If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. You can also drop me a question on my talk page.

Happy editing, Isomorphic 04:18, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Guibas and Stolfi

Hi, are you the Stolfi who wrote articles with Guibas? Mikkalai 19:59, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Santos Dumont

Hi Jorge. Regarding the Alberto Santos-Dumont claim -- "the first craft in the world to take off from the ground with its own landing gear and on its own power"-- Richard Pearse had already done that a couple of years earlier. Moriori 23:13, Apr 2, 2004 (UTC)

Greetings. Again, my thanks for your fine job editing the Santos-Dumont article.(I sent an email earlier.) I hope that we can at last move past the "who flew first" issue. It overshadows so much of what SD accomplished. It would be truly ironic if it overshadowed his entry in wikipedia as well. Best regards, Blimpguy 23:59, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Agouti, et al

Please don't remove links to nonexistant articles. It would be a royal pain to have to find all the places that should link to an article without those dead links. - UtherSRG 13:13, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Check out Agouti, Common Agouti and Agouti (genus), etc. - UtherSRG 14:39, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
And you're right... they are a mess. *grins* - UtherSRG 14:53, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Snake oil

JS, I've reverted your change as there was no duplicate link, and have restored the other wording change you made. Please check to see if I missed anything.

I've noticed your interest and position, and hope that you can find your way clear to contributing (if you're interested) to the assorted crypto articles. For instance, the Colossus article may be of interest, as also might be Shannon on his proof of the unbreakability of the one-time pad algorithm. There are two pointer pages to crypto, List of cryto topics and Topics in crypto, which may help with the navigation. Alternatively, what links here at cryptography is likely to be helpful as well. Note that cryptography itself is in the midst of some large changes; see the page history and the Talk page.

In any case, nice to interact with you. ww 17:11, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

See also my reply at Talk:Snake oil. ww


I probably shouldn't have been sticking my knife into the bull today too. Its good to separate Mithra from Mithras: the division is between Zoroastrian Mithra and Hellenistic-Roman Mithras. I've described the Hellenistic icons that the Romans continued to use, so "Mithras" is improved. Wetman 22:20, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

--- Well and succinctly improved opening at Hittite by the way. Wetman 03:19, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)


  • Regarding your question on whether Phanes is linked with the Persian Mitras or the Roman Mithras the current scholarly opinion seems to be that mitras wasn't the basis for Mithras, although given the Roman tactic of Syncretism it's possibly that they borrowed elements of him for their miThras - the Roman version is the one that makes him linked with the 'world egg', and certainly the persian version isn't linked with the sun (because of the Persian Ahura Mazda). Mithras is depicted emergng from the world egg on the University of Newcastle website link title [i've duplicated this info for causal users at the page "Phanes"]. Pydos 10:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)


Just wanted to say hi to another Hurrian enthusiast it seems. There is a little slander about be on the wiki pages stemming from someone whose vendetta against me is evident but I really am not that bad just tend to edit first and add references later. Happy Editing!!Zestauferov 14:47, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC) By the way given the suspect nature of ancient near eastern chronologies, you might consider avoiding the replacement of solid anchors like the names of contemporaries etc. with one of the several possible dates which have been suggested for such peoples. Generally speaking there are High Middle and Low chronological dates for near-eastyern chronologies, the middle is chosen not for accuracy but because it is simply in the middle. All the best Zestauferov 15:36, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC) Date uncertainty has not changed in the past 50 years no matter what any of us would like to believe. To give a fixed date to the layman is nothing less than deliberately misguiding (regardless of the good intention) the layman. Any dates put into an article should either be ranged to show the uncertainty(high date to low date), or at least accompanierd with a solid anchor wherever possible. except for that your contributions so far are an excellent addition to wiki, but be careful of creating too many short entries, there are stub advocates like myself and there are those people who are on a seek & delete campaign with regards to the more stublike articles. You will always have my support in these circumstances. All the best Zestauferov 02:24, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC) Centuries Zestauferov 02:50, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC) Excellent work on the Habiru page by the way. Zestauferov 02:51, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


Appologies for removing that comment. I moved it around a bit and then thought that it was just repetative and so removed it all together. I am very happy you set up the biblical Hittites page, and I am all in favour of distinguishing between biblical peoples and historical peoples. Sure the bible has some useful info about past-times, but I prefer to get the archaeology straight first before applying the bible. Don't be too upset :-) Zestauferov 19:00, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Transcaucasian Iberians

Hi Jeorge, I must say you are doing an excellent job trying to clear up the mess which has crept over topics related to this area. However unless something cvan be done about nationalism I am afraid that it might occupy much of your time in edit wars, which is why I had to give up trying to write on such topics. You have my support anyway. Keep up the good work. Zestauferov 05:42, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You must be getting quite irate with Lev now, I tried to reason with him many a time, my last post to him was quite cordial i think, but I gave up in the end. You are a stronger man than I. All the best Zestauferov 03:21, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

Levzur is incorrigible, I'm afraid. I plan to ban his proxies as he uses them to force him to either edit under his username or not at all. -- ChrisO 17:28, 7 May 2004 (UTC)


Hi Jorge,

I've requested arbitration regarding Levzur's conduct on Zviad Gamsakhurdia and now Nino Burjanadze but hadn't realised that he's also caused problems elsewhere. I'm becoming increasingly convinced that he's an inveterate edit warrior and nationalist crank. I've put a page of evidence up at User:Levzur/Evidence - if you wish to add any comments about your own experiences you're very welcome to do so. -- ChrisO 16:59, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)


Hi! I noticed you've contributed to computer science articles. I've started a project on WikiProject Computing to propose a standard pseudocode for use throughout the Wikipedia that I call wikicode. Please join the WikiProject (no commitment required) and please participate in the discussion about wikicode. Thanks!

Derrick Coetzee 16:50, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Revert wars

Quit reverting my stuff just because you don't understand it. For an example of the use of environment in a programming language, see Closure (computer science). This is a perfect example of a use where "non-local" variables are part of a function's environment. This page is linked from scope. --ssd 07:40, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

For the benefit of other readers, I did NOT engage in a "revert war". I reverted the environment article ONCE because Ssd had added two technical phrases which, in may view, made the definitions more confusing. Sdd re-reverted the article but fixed one of the problem items. I deleted the second problem phrase and explained why. Apparently Ssd did not undertand my objection and reverted again.
Jorge Stolfi 14:01, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
For the record, you reverted two different changes on the same article. The first time, all I did was rearrange the sentence to put the subject first and removed an incorrect word you didn't understand. The second time, you reverted something just because you didn't understand it, and didn't bother to follow the link I was trying to add. --ssd 20:48, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
To put this a little more nicely and a little less heatedly, your question in talk:environment#Environment in functional programming was a very good one, and one that should be covered in any comprehensive programming languages course. Your example (or perhaps a more complicated one) and my explanation should already be in one of the scope articles or in something talking about local vs. heirarchal scope or something like that. (If it is not, we should look for a good place to put it.) If you want to argue that local variables are part of the environment, while I think that is a bit silly, I won't argue with it, as it is more redundant than wrong. (That's more like the difference between a subset and a proper subset.)
More to the point, the environment of a programming unit (function, statement, whatever) is what is in scope. scope disambiguates environment in this sense.
I don't mind you asking questions about stuff I add you don't understand--that points to need for clarification. But please don't delete it outright without trying to fix it or understand it. --ssd 21:22, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
(yet another point here...) I have noticed a dangerous trend in wikipedia. When there is wrong material in an article, someone comes by and thinks to themself "this is wrong" and rather than fix it, they add to the statement to try to make it right. I am as guilty as anyone on this. When you criticized my attempt at fixing environment variables, it forced me to rethink the whole dfn from scratch and delete the wrongness and replace it with something better rather than just add to the wrongness. --ssd 21:28, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Empire of Brazil

Good job sectioning the Empire of Brazil article! 172 10:48, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Portuguese language

Jorge, pus o artigo Portuguese language como featured article candidate depois que você alterou o inglês do artigo e o tornou mais suave, linear e cheio de qualidade. Ficou tão bom que tive que o por como "candidato" :). Gostei também do seu trabalho em Portuguese alphabet e o linkei ao da língua Portuguesa, por estar tão bom e isento, nunca pensei que tivesse algo assim na wikipedia. Se bem que se tenha enganado da forma como nós pronunciámos "óptimo", "acção", etc. Só em raros casos é que há diferenças, também não pronunciámos a maioria desses sons. Devido à forma isenta com que trata as coisas, o que acho um pouco raro num brasileiro (desculpe), gostava que desse uma olhada em Portuguese Creole e o altere como achar por bem. Dê uma opinião sobre a existência ou não de crioulos portugueses no Brasil, e o que era afinal a Língua Geral. Esperando o seu contributo. Um abraço do outro lado do Atlântico --Pedro 00:22, 25 May 2004 (UTC)


I would like to nominate you for adminship. Please let me know on my talk page if you would accept the nomination. --"DICK" CHENEY 05:13, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

You have been nominated for adminship and your acceptance (or refusal) of that nomination is needed. Cheers, —No-One Jones 08:25, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Skull and crossbones

Thank you for placing a fiercer looking crossbones on the skull and crossbones page. That crossbones looks more like a poison skull and crossbones than the Jolly Roger. The Jolly Roger looks more like a pirate skull and crossbones. User:

Voynich Manuscript

Voynich Manuscript

Just an encouraging word: enjoyed your contributions to the Voynich Manuscript page. I just recently nominated the revised version to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. -- Smerdis of Tlön 16:49, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It was with great pleasure that i noticed a WP name in the copy of the Scientific American that came today. --Jerzy(t) 21:21, 2004 Jun 12 (UTC)

What, no complimentary copies for cited scholars?

Glad you could find it so soon; i subscribe, and my impression was that retailers lag most of a month behind subscribers!

Another interesting aspect of this is how long it took me to realize that i probably read that article close to first because i was in the middle of Quicksilver when the issue arrived. What a treat to have them bouncing off each other in my brain. --Jerzy(t) 05:08, 2004 Jul 2 (UTC)

Polyglot oral tongue

Hi. I noticed that you truncated the introductory paragraph of this subsection, removing the title of Levitov's book. This transformed the next two paragraphs about the Endura rite and the Cathari into non-sequiturs. Please read more carefully before you edit. — Clarknova 19:59, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article on luigi

not that I really care about luigi either, but all 30 of the articles linking to luigi have to do with the Mario Brothers game, so it makes more sense to have the article on his character at "Luigi" than at "Luigi Mario". The information on the name Luigi is not linked to a single time, so why does it get priority?

Staple gun

Well, I would say that your valiant effort has worked. I will go vote now to keep that. Nice work. Cheers. Burgundavia 08:56, Jun 19, 2004 (UTC)


Hi! Just to let you know, the little bits of research I was doing while editing the article actually led me to believe that the origin of both name and god are quite a quagmire, and that there is in fact no consensus among scholars. If you have sources that state otherwise, of course... :) Thanks! --Puffy jacket 02:02, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The Wall

Hello, Jorge. I saw the part that mentions something about Serra do Mar being known as "The Wall" on the city of São Paulo article. At the time it just sounded strange to me, but when you removed it, I remembered something. I live in São Paulo (Brazilian, yes), and something just hit me. "A Muralha". Sounds familiar? =P

I think that's what the guy meant with that comment. Not sure if it should stay there or not. I'm not going to edit that. I'll leave the decision to you.

Be well. – Mackeriv 16:54, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)


Thanks so much for all your work on Habiru -- I was just looking over the history page trying to figure out who'd done all that wonderful work, and your name seems to be the most prominant. Great job! Ben 18:19, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Logistic function

Hello. I agree with you that logistic function is a better title than logistic curve. But click on what links here on that page, and you will find that a bunch of links need fixing as a result of your move. I've fixed some double redirects (double redirects don't work), but there is more to do. Can you help with this? Michael Hardy 15:13, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)


Hi Jorge, long time! Wetman & I have been gathering info on the Phoenician Talk page to try and sort out the political mess which has built up there. I remembered the excellent job you did with Hittites, etc., and I was wondering if you might be able to Join in on the Phoenician page too? The other reason I am asking is because I thought perhaps you might be able to look at the article more neutrally, since I am aware that I too have a political perspective in that I believe there is a chance that some of them were the Israelite tribe of Dan. Please drop in on the talk page if you have some time to help out. All the best. Zestauferov 08:53, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Edit attribution

Hi Jorge. Edits from your IP have now been reattributed to your username. Regards Kate Turner | Talk 04:32, 2004 Sep 5 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:


Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 13:42, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hurrian article and Avestan language/script

I notice you edited the Hurrian article quite a bit - it was recently changed to add Avestan as a script - the anon who did it mostly left vandalism but I don't know if this is vandalism or a legitimate inclusion - do you know? User talk:Andris Trödel|talk 16:49, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree with what you said about List of Common Symbols. --Jontsang 12:19, May 28, 2005 (UTC)


Hi, Can you upload the image Image:Ph-animals-jaburu-1.jpg to [1]? It would be useful because it can be used in other wiki-projects as well. Thanks --Uwe Gille 17:15, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lots of edits, not an admin

Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. It looks like you've left, but if you come back and are at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. I've marked you on this list as "inactve". Feel free to update this as well. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) July 3, 2005 18:02 (UTC)

Paper mulberry

Please look there Talk:Mulberry.  :]~~ Yug 5 July 2005 16:51 (UTC)

Al- Razi

Hello Jorge, Since you were one of the first to have edited al-Razi, you probably will be happy to know that I have taken it upon me to do a major copy-editing on the page Al-Razi. Indeed it needed it. So far I have almost finished 8 pages out of the 14. It will take at least another month to finalize it. Some of the literature is difficult to trace and/or translate. Probably have to go to the 'Koninklijke Bibliotheek' here in the Netherlands, and I might have to leave that till much later.
I have just joined as an user/participant of this fabulous site.
Warm greetings and so long. CHITRANI 16:36, 9 September 2005 (UTC)09 Sep.2005 18.30 (GMT +1)

G - tilde

You're welcome!.

But the g with tilde appears perfectly on my Mozilla Firefox. MS-IE is troublesome with other kinds of script, with Devanagari it's awful......

Joao de Deus

I noticed that you changed the name from John of God to Joao de Deus. There is a Portuguese writer called João de Deus and there is a Spanish saint called John of God. I checked out these names on Wikipedia before I decided on John of God. I debated that name for ages and after seeing that in English he is always known as John of God, I chose that name. You attached a message for cleanup. What would you suggest?Vogensen 19:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Fritz

I am not happy with the "hypothetical German surgeon". Couldn't we just call him a spirit or what followers consider to be a spirit. I eliminated the dates referring to birth or death since there is no proof that he actually lived.Vogensen 22:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Abusive use of internal links

I noticed that in your cleanup of the Zé Arigó article you made links to such words as doctor, nurse, apron, operating room, and every date that appears. Is this Wikipedia policy? It seems abusive to me and non-productive. If we make links to every common word that has an article then we will end up having our articles filled with links. An article theoretically could have only links. Surely we must have links only to articles of interest for the topic, or am I wrong? Vogensen 14:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand how internal links can be "abusive". They are simply tools for visitors and need not be applied. True, the typography can look cluttered, but a user has the option of controlling how Wikipedia pages are rendered if they really care all that much. Maybe it's a matter of personal taste, but it should be a matter of Wikipedia policy... I'm for maximal wikification. Myron 18:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Jabiru bird and Khaba

Thanks for pointing out my mistake that the jabiru bird entry I had been linking to was in fact pointing to a South American bird. I did some more digging and it turns out that your guess that it was a Saddle-billed stork that was being referenced was correct (I removed the speculation in the Khaba article on it being a Sacred Ibis). But note that there must be an Egyptian equivalent for "Jabiru" -- perhaps the South American bird was named after the African one?

A couple of Egyptological articles that reference a "jabiru" bird, specifically to the hieroglyphic sign being used:

Will make a small addition to the Saddle-billed Stork page with regard to this. You may wish to do the same for the Jabiru bird article. Cheers! Captmondo 04:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thousands separator

Hi Jorge,

I used a nonbreaking space to separate thousands in the population figures because that is the SI standard. The comma is used for a decimal point in many countries, including some English speaking countries such as South Africa. Could you replace the spaces, unless you find a Wikipedia policy to the contrary?

Thanks, kwami 08:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Need your help with Article on Grande River

I wrote a brief article on the Grande River (Rio Grande in Portuguese) and someone re-directed it to Rio Grande (Paraná). This is confusing since the name of the river in English is Grande not Rio Grande. You can look at the Britannica or at Encarta and both have Grande River. It is Rio Grande if we are doing the Portuguese section. And the river is certainly not in the state of Paraná as the name in parentheses implies. Who do we talk to to explain the problem? Vogensen 13:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

AfD Belizean Kriole language

You know you could put the entire article of Belizean Creole into Belizean Kriol language and redirect from there, right? Sorry if you already knew this. - Rudykog 02:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

You used the move button or copy/pasted it? Was the article deleted before you moved? What you said about the copy/paste thing was right and I was wrong, I didn't notice that, I had assumed it was simply a type of merge since there was no article and it was just a blank page and there would be no harm done. - Rudykog 05:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

How come?

How come you've got such a wide range of interesting, quality articles? Are you really one single person, or actually a Brazilian collective of off-beat swots? Suspicious.--shtove 00:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


I rv'd Pig (disambiguation). I believe this is the proper format, for a dis page. Thanks SirIsaacBrock 16:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Ryunosuke Akutagawa

Hi. Thanks for the tip (re/ moving rather than copying). Initially, I tried to "Move this page" but since there was already a page at the new name (a redirect), I couldn't. So I did everything a non-admin could do.  ;-) Sorry about that edit history. --Ds13 02:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Technical business

Hi Jorge. I read some of your comments at talk:function (mathematics). I did not research well-enough the issue to give a qualified opinion about the discussion there, but I have a general remark however.

The rule of thumb is that one should not try to make things too complicated, at least in the openning paragraphs. More precisely, the introduction must be as acesssible as possible (without being silly, of course). More complicated content can go down the text. Some more information is avaiable at Wikipedia:Make technical articles accessible.

Again, this is a rule of thumb. I don't quite know what position to take on function (mathematics), but I thought I would give you my general perspective on things. You can reply here if you have any comments. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Class binary relations

The formal distinction between sets and classes arises in your examples: the membership and subset relations are proper classes, unless they are restricted to specific sets and their power sets. So the remark is needed from the outset. Randall Holmes 17:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed the class reference I added to function (mathematics) (where I agree that it is a technicality). The set/class distinction is important in the relation context though (precisely because of equality, membership and subset taken as general relations). I'll try writing a subsection. Randall Holmes 18:11, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

See what you think of my sets/classes section. Randall Holmes 18:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Sets and classes

I think that our respective edits (which we entered within seconds of each other, I think) are complementary. Your brief warning about the membership/subset example above is expanded by my fuller account below. Randall Holmes 19:52, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't realize that you had edited the sets and classes section itself. Some of your modifications have been further modified: for example, it isn't necessarily true that assuming the the equality relation is a set leads to inconsistency (the equality and inclusion relations and the universal set (though not the membership relation) are all sets in the set theory NFU, but I don't want to say that here...) But I think that we are converging on something sensible. Randall Holmes 20:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


I hope you enjoyed your vacation.

I think the reason that your editing of the function article drew more fire than your many other edits is that it is a gateway article. That is, it is an article likely to be read by many people who don't know math, and it should be an article they can read. You are apparently repelled by writing aimed at the level necessary to convey the idea of a function to a non-mathematician, but that is the level at which articles such as this one must be aimed. I can write "real" mathematics, too, where that is appropriate.

I hope the response to my request for outside opinions has convinced you that the wiki style requires avoiding technicalities in the introductory paragraphs. When you return, the article will be much changed, no doubt. Please, if you want to change it, do so a little at a time, and wait for discussion.

Rick Norwood 20:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Jorge, let me first take this opportunity to thank you for your thesis work on Oriented Projective Geometry, which I continue to enjoy citing. Though I post to Wikipedia anonymously, we know a number people in common, including Leo. Like you, I am trained to respect rigor in mathematics, including careful definitions.

That said, my time around the mathematics pages here at Wikipedia has uncovered a regular pattern of tension in how to begin an article. Often the tension is misunderstood and unstated, and revert wars ensue. One side wants to begin with a precise definition; the other side wants to begin with more casual introductory material. Typically the body of the article sees little of the controversy, and often languishes unrefined as the intro is rewritten again and again.

It's a pity to waste creative energy fighting over an issue that has already been decided. The Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics) comes down firmly on the side of a casual start, not a formal one.

However, this is not a license for sloppy writing and bad definitions. A reader should clearly perceive the difference between the informal and formal statements, and the formal statements should be precise and correct, even if not accessible to a general audience. Personally, I find the informal material challenging to write well, but gratifying when it succeeds. I hope you'll give it a try. --KSmrqT 01:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Moving Kaffir

I wish you had discussed this before going ahead and unilaterally moving it. It is a misnomer to call it the "South Africa Kaffir people". dewet| 13:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, I see what you've been doing, and its a good move towards straightening out the whole mess. What I'd suggest is merging everything from South Africa Kaffir people into the "South Africa" section of Kaffir (ethnic slur). I think that the complete use in the South African context can be contained in the "ethnic slur" category. dewet| 09:21, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


Hours of dedicated editing thrown away by brash and unsophisticated editors? It is a tragedy, and after suffering too much indignity of that sort myself I decided to mostly confine my edits to talk pages. Talk contributions persist where others can read them, and on occasion I have eventually won enough support to move a version to the article page, replacing poor writing. Wikipedia's quality control mechanisms are still inadequate, and I'm unwilling to waste my time producing material that will never be seen. My strategem is not ideal, but you might want to see if it works for you. --KSmrqT 00:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Video clip?

The anon user left similar messages on about 15 pages. They seem to be related to pages people have edited, have the same message template, the web site does not seem to exist, the page would be an active server page. Not sure if it was spam or something more sinister, but "assumed good faith" anf pointed out to the anon that copyright would make it unlikely we could use the "clip". Rich Farmbrough. 12:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Pyrometric Cone

As a working potter, I would ask you to trust me on this one. Pyrometric cones are based both on reaching temperature and the time/duration of temperature. If you ramp the temp up rapidly to, for example 2350 degrees F, and drop the temp immediately, the cone will not have time to change and deform. They do not "melt" so much as change chemically to a more fluid glaze/glassine substance. There is a web site on the Pyrometric cone article which might have information on this process. I'm reverting back to my version. Let me know if you have further objections. WBardwin 06:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Layout standards

I really don't recommend that you mess around with layout standards. There's very little to gain from being inconsistent to other articles and you're bound to get reverted sooner or later again. I advise you to just trust the standard and concentrate on prose instead.

Peter Isotalo 16:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, which articles are you referring to? Jorge Stolfi 21:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I was refering to Portuguese language and the native name. The smaller the details, the more of a source of conflict they tend to be.
Peter Isotalo 11:00, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

See the talk page. Jorge Stolfi 19:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Kafir Discussion

In case you haven't noticed, I have added several comments to Talk:Kafir (Islam). joturner 05:37, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Native American name controversy

Please comment on Talk:Native American name controversy regarding your recent changes to that article. I've posted my concerns there, where other current maintainers of that page (which I created, but do not actively maintain these days) can discuss the changes with you. -Harmil 12:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


Hi There! don't u think the new images are too bright? and last but not least, thanks for ur help! Jfreyre

lol you are right the old version was too dark (my bad), but the new ones are too bright, maybe we'll have to fix them and decrease the bright/constrast atributes Jfreyre
Well hell no.. I mainly use win XP as my OS and maybe you are right about the different aproach of standart gamma across plattaforms, but in matter of facts I think my monitor its too bright.
The readability of those images is another point and as You said the constrast ratio between the text and the background wasn't the best one, and It was a poor choise of my own, mainly 'cause i made those image with paint and powerpoint(!!) (I didn't have another image editor at that time) and I had to draw the boundaries by hand... as you can see I was working with my nails LOL... so what do you think? we can set the gamma value at a midle point between those image and set a better background for the text or you can try to upload those image with the .png format and then we'll have to delete the first images
and finally May you watch my others images and give me a feedback? I would appreciated Jfreyre

Eis, cadê, etc.

It's funny that you mentioned these "few grammatically peculiar words such as eis ("here is"), cadê ("where is"), tomara ("let's hope"), oxalá ("let's hope that")". There is a recent paper on them: "Bute falar de predicadores rígidos!", in "Actas do XX Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística" (2004). Velho 19:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


Let's have this discussion at the proper talk page. Velho 16:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Almost time for Hermetic Alchemy

I've nearly finished the work I need to do on the Hermeticism, filling things in for the primary draft. So, I'll be able to start the Hermetic Alchemy article very soon.

KV 19:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, I see us coming into conflict again, in the future, psychic surgery, which you created, is a term also used in Reiki for what some have started calling "aura cleansing" for PR. It's not too different, other than it's used to remove mental things, not physical things such as bones....... though these mental things are objectified by the patient for removal.

KV 19:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You replied: As fas as I can tell, the "psychic surgeries" of Reiki and of the Filipino/Brazilian surgeons have nothing in common except the name and the use of hands. If that is the case, it doesn't make sense to discuss both in the same article. The only issue is how the articles should be named.

Well, we probably have to make a disambiguation page still :) But Reiki won't be coming until I get all the Hermeticism stuff fixed up. I've learned not to spread myself too thin.
KV 06:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Gaita Galega

Olá Jorge; quem alterou aquelas ligações para outros idiomas na página galician gaita fui eu, por um motivo simples: todas aquelas ligações referem-se a artigos genéricos sobre gaita-de-fole, e em inglês já há um artigo assim: bagpipe. Assim, deixei apenas as ligações correspondentes diretamente à gaita galega, que por enquanto só há em português e galego, para além do inglês. Fiz isso na intenção de melhorar o artigo, deixando-o mais preciso. Aguardo resposta. Tonyjeff 19:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Jorge, eu percebo seu ponto. Mas da mesma forma que um artigo não precisa ser necessariamente 1:1, o oposto também não. Geralmente, fazem-se ligações do tipo como a que está lá quando não há artigos diretamente relacionados. No caso, há. A função de ligar artigos genéricos sobre gaita-de-fole é mais relevante a Bagpipe. Imagino que você se considere o dono desse artigo, mas perceba que a Wiki é um trabalho de contribuição plural. A mesma situação com a página galega do artigo, a qual também apresentava dezenas de ligações para artigos genéricos, e atualizaram apenas para os artigos correspondentes. E o fato de eu não ter na minha página pessoal um quadradinho aferindo-me colaborador da língua inglesa não me exime de colaborar com a Wiki inglesa. Essa é uma questão de lógica.

Por outro lado, tirar de bagpipes a entrada sobre gaita galega é uma bobagem, pois listam-se ali vários modelos de forma genérica, apresentando-se ligações para artigos específicos de cada modelo, a serem espandidos. Não há por que acreditar que o artigo sobre gaita galega ficaria pior sem aquela lista de ligações. O que deve ser feito, isso sim, é melhor a qualidade do texto e abordar outros aspectos. Tonyjeff 23:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


The group already has its own language page (Sahaptian languages). The article I wrote is about the group of tribes that speak the language. I'm reverting your change. --Primetime 02:14, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I will read it. Where is that policy? The reason I'm asking is because other, more respected encyclopedias list the Sarahaptin under "Sahaptin" (including Encyclopaedia Britannica[2] and Encyclopedia Americana). Also please provide evidence to support your claim of there being both a Sarahaptian language group and a single Sarahaptan language. Also, in case you can't tell, I'm becoming irritated by your stalking of my edits. --Primetime 02:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Nothing is wrong with the page. It says, "Sahaptian is a group of languages". You said, "Sahaptin language is just ONE of the languages in the Sahaptian family". However, there is no such thing as a Sahaptian language family.[3] Sahaptian is a language group.[4] Also, if you don't find that policy, I'll move the entry because "Sahaptian peoples" is not an intuitive search term. --Primetime 02:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm willing to leave the "Sahaptin people" article where it is now if you leave me alone from now on. As for the unicode templates, I have decided to restore them because anything that makes Wikipedia easier to read (rather than edit) makes it better. --Primetime 03:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia in Tetum

Please check your WP:NA entry

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

  1. If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
  2. If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
  3. Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 03:54, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler warning

You recently removed the spoiler warning from Rashomon. It is generally Wikipedia convention to insert them in articles about films, books, or games where spoilers exist. Yes, I sympathize with you view ("What does one expect in a section called plot?") but please don't remove them as they have become a de facto Wikipedia convention. savidan(talk) (e@) 18:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

David Morgan-Mar

The languages created by David Morgan-Mar are not very notable and unless they are included in his biography they are good candidates for deletion. Cheers, —Ruud 18:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. You may also be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science. —Ruud 18:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I have listed these articles on Afd (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Morgan-Mar). Your input is kindly requested. Cheers, —Ruud 22:10, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


Re: your removals. You were correct IMHO, yet: isn't it important to point out that the evolution and the very name of cocoliche were tied to the interplay between immigrants and the criollo/gaucho stock? Actually, the lifeline of cocoliche was comic theater (all the way till Dario Vittori). elpincha 11:14, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Root page

Please see root page for explanation of backlink--Light current 07:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


Hi. I added those articles to the "North American English" category because I saw that Tobagonian Creole English, Bajan, and others were already there. They should either all be in or all be out and - as you seem to be saying - perhaps the Creoles don't belong there. Bolivian Unicyclist 13:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Latin America Demographics

Can you please cite that study you are using? It will help clear up a lot of ambiguity in the Demographics section. Thanks! --BWD (talk) 17:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC)