User talk:Kokot.kokotisko

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

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

-- utcursch | talk

Redirects[edit]

On 19-Jan, you created a "soft" redirect from Nucleotide triphosphates to Nucleoside triphosphate. You should do a real redirect in cases like this. The instructions for how are at Wikipedia:Redirect. I've fixed this one, but if you need help in the future, let me know. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 17:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Cnx.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Cnx.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Lem[edit]

Hey KK - it is always good to login to Wiki before making edits, so I could have left you a msg on your userpage earlier. I find two problems with the following sentence: Lem articulates this recursively through the mouth of one of his characters (scientist Alfred Testa speaking about Aristid Acheropoulos' "The New Cosmogony" in Lem's Perfect Vacuum). 1) it is not clear what 'this' (boled) refers to 2) it is too detailed for WP:LEAD. Lead should be a summary of the important info from the article, not contain new information not mentioned in the main body. Perhaps we could rewrite the lead to make it complaint with WP:MOS?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not? Sorry that I'm answering only after four years, but I'll go to the page to see what has changed there. Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 22:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

3RR[edit]

Please discuss all future changes at Talk:Deepwater_Horizon_oil_spill#Gulf_Gusher_Title - Aalox (Say HelloMy Work) 08:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I already do. Please note that I only reverted twice so far, not three times. Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 10:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

July 2010[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to the page Islam, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. TbhotchTalk C. 22:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Laurentum
Emergent evolution
Top kill
F. David Peat
Modular Function Deployment
Nucleoside-diphosphate kinase
Philosophy of Organism
Noopolitik
Schumacher College
Kommunity FK
Parhat v. Gates
Buffalo Soldier (song)
Cytidine monophosphate
Modular design
Holism in ecological anthropology
Nucleoside-triphosphate diphosphatase
Thymidine triphosphate
Kristi Lee
Nucleotide exchange factor
Cleanup
BP
Oil spill
Connectome
Merge
Garapa
Ultrasound
Antireductionism
Add Sources
Trimer (chemistry)
Tony Hayward
Criticism of Hadith
Wikify
Peter Deadman
Ultraviolet communication
Dave Murzin
Expand
Wikia Search
History of Fox News
Joint Task Force North

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of Ruby language learning resources[edit]

A tag has been placed on List of Ruby language learning resources, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Moreover, please add more verifiable sources, not only 3rd party sources. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: Speedy delete contest button.png which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Gonchibolso12 (talk) 04:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I replied on the talk page. Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 05:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I've suggested userfying this to give you time to consider what you want to do with it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:26, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Please do not regard this topic as something private to my person. As I already said, there are other users who believe that [kinds of online guides are widely influential, and should absolutely be listed on the Wikipedia]. Please understand that this is an issue I'm trying to resolve, not something I just made up due to excess of ego and free time. Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 14:21, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Kokot.kokotisko. You have new messages at Sphilbrick's talk page.
Message added SPhilbrickT 17:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
An attempt to explain my point more clearly: Sorry I didn't make my point clearly when I said "i think it would be equally of value to provide a list of resources for R or SAS.". The specific language wasn't the point. Pick something you do know enough about to follow what is done - C, Excel, basic, Powerpoint, Visio, whatever. All of them presumably have a list of resources somewhere. How does Wikipedia deliver this? Or do they? If it is not done in any case, it might mean that it isn't compatible with the Wikipedia vision. If it is done, it might give you some hints about how it could be done in an acceptable way here. --SPhilbrickT 20:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I actually checked other programming languages before I started making my list, and I found that computer languages in general do not have such lists of resources available. So I was sure that creating it would be bending customs, if not necessarily rules. I cannot say that I was oblivious to the possibility that the page I started will raise a controversion. But again, that's the fate of all the new WP pages nowadays. Almost all the non-controversial WP entries have been created by now (except deep technicalities), so creating pages today is a matter of structuring the information. The reasons why I proceeded with the proposed page were not exactly community consensus. You seem to be willing to listen a bit, so I will explain a bit.
Some years ago, I found a web article about comparison programming languages. There are tons of such articles on the web. I was picking through them for more than a week, before I found the one that really rocked (well written and consistent). It was written by a pro Google developer and it basically said, that there were three kinds of computer languages: production, experimental, and 'the languages we are stuck with'. It said that there were only like 4 or 5 production languages: Java, C++/C#, something and Ruby, and it gave reasons for each. Unfortunately I forgot what that 'something' was, and the article, as is the fate of good things, is not online anymore. Then those 'languages we are stuck with' are otherwise languages used internally by certain programs, which we are forced to learn whether we want, or not. Those would be like bash, Lisp (emacs), Tcl/Tk and others. I intentionally omitted Perl and Python, as I am not sure which of the two categories decribed so far they belonged to. Then he went on about experimental languages, of the many he mentioned I can remember only Haskell.
It was basically this guy who talked me into Ruby. As I started to use Ruby for biology calculations, the problems have emerged, mostly with versions of Ruby, versions of Rubygems, version switching and such. The documentation I used to learned from turned out to be obsolete, described methods deprecated, and so on. I went on with Ruby nevertheless, with relative success, compared to Octave, which I used before that. That's how I learned how difficult it was to get valid online info on Ruby problems.
So somehow, that Google developer made me think that Ruby is a member of some "big 4" general purpose computer languages, which are not a waste of time to learn. I know how this might sound, but I believe this single guy more than the whole crowd of other writers. I did some math competitions before and I know how some people simply mentally surpass others by several levels. I think this programmer was the case. Never again I heard anyone talking so clearly and logically on tnis subject. So this might just be my message for you: If you have somebody to teach, make sure they learn something useful when they start taking interest in programming.
I actually do not know precisely to what degree Java, C and that other "production languages" suffer from the immaturity problem, but Ruby definitely is the youngest of the 4, by a wide margin. It only seems to me, that Java, C, and that other language are older and more mature, that they change less nowadays, respect backward compatibility more and whatnot. I hereby admit, I was bluffing. I was talking as if I was sure, but I just 'guessed'. If it was about Excel, I could 100% say that compared to Ruby, it is totally stable. But for Java, C++, I just guessed that it is much easier to learn them from a textbook published 5 years ago and still use the same code 5 years later. Or that online crowd has less to say about C and Java specs than about Ruby. Having admitted I just guessed, allow me to quatify, that I still believe that this guess would be right with more than 80% probability, discounted by how much you decide to trust me... Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  —Darkwind (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Feathercoin copy?[edit]

Hi I noticed you wanted to keep the Feathercoin article. Do you happen to have a copy somewhere? I'm on a mission to rescue coin related WP articles about to be deleted by copying them to coinwiki.info, but I was a bit too late with FTC :/ Guaka (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Nope, I'm in the process of asking the copy of the text from Sandstein. Also, I believe that the admin in question grossly overstepped by deleting the article; Feathercoin notability is already not in question. Kokot.kokotisko (talk) 00:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)