User talk:Lumos3/Archive 1

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

Archive Lumos3 Talk page - Sept 2003 to Dec 2005[edit]


I am very happy to see another business specialist making positive contributions to our 'opedia. There are currently a little more than 700 business and economics articles. However, we are weak in Human Resource Management. Your expertise will be appreciated. The following is a set of lists that will show you the current state of the 'opedia.

When you write an article, feel free to add a link to your article in any appropriate lists. This will help people find your articles. mydogategodshat 08:27, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

London commuter belt[edit]

Hi. I noticed you've added to this article some things - great. Unfortunately, some of them seem to be actually part of Greater London, and therefore are inconsistent with the list's introduction, which defines the LCB as excluding this area. If we added places that used to be part of the LCB, but are now considered 'London', this list would grow enormously, and there would be no reason why not to include Croydon or even Southwark. Any thoughts? Morwen 20:00, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)

Camu Camu[edit]

Hi Lumos3. I agree with the action to use Camu Camu instead of CamuCamu, but wonder why you did not use the "Move this page" feature which would have preserved the history with the article. WormRunner 22:56, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)


Hi there,

I noticed you changed one of the references on the Bureau des Longitudes page to correspond with the correct citation of a book. The reason that this reference was not cited in the correct format of a book originally is that the reference wasn't the book itself, but instead a lecture by the book's author. I'm not sure how this would be properly cited. Any input would be appreciated.


Acegikmo1 00:00, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

This is my standard reply on these classification systems. They are first of all for the benefit of the public so that they can objectively compare all the various CAM articles with each other. Next, the infoboxes are here to make the science people happy. Let them have their way on this one. This will put an end to the edit wars. Anybody truly interested in orthomolecular medicine will ignore these classifications anyway. Your benefit will come from being able to fully articulate the orthomolecular medical viewpoint. Perhaps you should be restructuring the article so that some of the sub-topics can be supported with evidence? Have you fully articulated the orthomolecular medical viewpoint in the article? Just let the public decide what they will do with the information contained in this article. -- John Gohde 03:21, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket[edit]

I see you have recently contributed to the article cricket. May I invite you to a new WikiProject to improve the quality and depth of cricket articles on Wikipedia. It's located on Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket. I'm taking the approach of let's see who's interested and let's see which bits we want to improve/expand to begin with. Once we know that, hopefully we can work together to improve Wikipedia's cricket coverage. jguk 16:30, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing[edit]

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)


An attempt is being made to remove all content on astrology from the articles on the planets. If you have time, please review the entry on Jupiter and put it on your watchlist. ShutterBugTrekker 17:20, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi Lumos,

I wanted to discuss my reccent edit on the astrology page which you changed because I do not feel that what I wrote was slanted in any direction, or was not NPOV. The section, after I edited it said:

"A few Western and all Jyotish (Hindu) astrologers use the sidereal zodiac, which uses the true astronomical positions of the stars and constellations which lie on the ecliptic. The majority of Western astrologers base their work on the tropical zodiac, which correlates with the seasons and uses the same reference point (First Point of Aries) as modern astronomy."

I am not quite sure why you thought that this was not NPOV. The tropical zodiac begins on the first day of spring when we have equal days and equal nights, moving towards longer days. This is the so-called tropical sign of "Aries", which by definition is tied to the beginning of the spring season. It is the same with the rest of the tropical signs. Cancer is defined by the summer solsctice, Libra by the fall equinox, and Capricorn by the winter solsctice. Thus the tropical zodiac which is used by western astrologers is intimately tied into the seasons, and this is an extremely important feature which separates it from the sidereal zodaic. There are many significations which derive directly from these areas of the seasons, such as the Quadriplicities, and indeed most interpretations which are given be western astrologers are done with this in mind. In this light it is not even relevant to point out that constellations aren't aligned with the tropical zodiac in the same way that they were, because any astrologer using the tropical zodiac is knowingly doing so for a specific reason because both zodiacs serve different purposes. The only issue really is that they both retained the same names for each of the 30 degree divisions that they both shared at one point in time.

As for the astronomical thing. What was being pointed out in the last sentence was that astronomers also usually define the vernal point as the first degree of Aries. The First Point of Aries also marks the Celestial Meridian, which is the zero-point for calculations of Right Ascension. So, what was written wasn't implying that astronomy supported the tropical zodiac, but just that both used the same reference point. Thats all. I wasn't trying to skew the article or anything. Sorry if it appeared as such. --Chris Brennan 18:11, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

New Age[edit]

Thank you so much for noticing the vandalism on New Age. This may be the first time it has happened. I check the article often but this anonymous 218. . . individual escaped my scrutiny. If the person can be traced to other vandalisms we all know what to do. BF 08:10, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm stunned at another major rewrite of New Age! The 218... person had their work saved in New Age/Revised and only 4 changes were made since. However, I find that people love to change the intro on New Age, and if let alone will proceed to make further changes, leading ultimately to what we tried to avoid when you 'saved' the article from that rewrite recently. I know everyone is free to edit any page, but how can a cited article be used for reference when people are changing content away from the longtime meaning and intent? I'm beginning to lose interest now that these recent white-out overwrites have occurred. I should have requested the page be protected right after it was cited. BF 17:54, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

But guardian angels need some time off too! The article looks fine, now. The recent picayune "enhancements" are more of the same— editor's personal taste, preferences, choice of style— rather than adding new information and new ideas. This recycled past to do with the article makes one wonder about in-house fighting, edit wars, and inappropriate behavior by random forces who need to retain those who blindly live in "The Matrix". The Diane Brandon Metaphysical Gnostic quote was white-outed; she personally gave permission to use her website, and now it's just a link-to. Would you request the article be locked down for several weeks, until the dust settles? I know doing this might imprison the text. However if someone really wanted to edit during that time they could ask for the 'keys' BF 16:13, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

sigh... makes an angel wish for Aquarius' Spring appearance over Giza 95 yrs early. the magdalene's also working overtime since the da vanci code. ok ok back to work! BF 18:33, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I accept your style Lumos now that only some great lines were left I wrote originally remain. It is *your* article now. This is only about tastes and preferences. When I began the article you weren't here. I am happy you guard New Age and I hope you read all the old talk archives, so you can understand what happened from the beginnings. As far as citing, I will ask that the citing source be able to find the exact article cited, back in time. When someone happens to check the cited source and click onto Wiki, a history link showing the article 'at the time' would be helpful someplace within the article so the curious reader will see the state in history and understand why it was worth citing. BF 01:55, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Votes for Deletion: February 15, 2005[edit]

Three VfD's are taking place on key Project of Alternative Medicine articles.

I am contacting you because you have in the past made edits to Terms and concepts in alternative medicine. And, I would hate to see all your efforts to improve this article be wasted because other editors voted to delete it.

I need you to vote to KEEP the following.

Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/List_of_terms_and_concepts_used_in_alternative_medicine This article is extremely important to our project.

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of miscellaneous topics related to alternative medicine

And, vote to REDIRECT the following.

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Philosophy of alternative medicine

Please vote in favor of the Project on Alternative Medicine today, before it is too late.

-- John Gohde 15:41, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Character set damage[edit]

You're apparently using editing tools which mess up some characters. Maybe you're using Microsoft tools with Smart Quotes enabled. (SEWilco 16:40, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Category:UK Wikipedians[edit]

Hi, just to let you know that the list of UK participants at the UK notice board was getting rather long, so I have replaced it with the above category which I have added to your user page. -- Francs2000 | Talk 30 June 2005 20:14 (UTC)

Integral theory[edit]

Why are you removing the Integral theory template from every article? --goethean 22:37, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

References and links go at the rear of articles not at the head in all Wikipedia articles.
Untrue — as you undoubtedly know, the use of templates as panels of links is a common Wikipedia custom. --goethean 14:39, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
Yes I do know this, and its not the use of a box of related links that I object to but its position at the head of the articles. There is clear guidance on this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style#"See also" and "Related topics" sections. I have placed the boxes within these sections where they are most appropriate. A quick tour of wikipedia featured articles will show that this convention is universally adhered to. Lumos3 12:38, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

You stole my nickname! My username is "Lumos" in many places... Okay, you didn't steal it, but still, it's weird that there are two "New Age" people with "Lumos" for a name...

I took it from the Harry Potter novels. Lumos is used to throw light on a subject by illuminating a wand. I use Lumos1 and 2 elsewhere


Sorry my message was off target. I am doing these mass mailings a lot, so I am actually surprised this does not happen to me more often... And thanks for supporting psychotherapy. Best wishes --Fenice 22:25, 5 August 2005 (UTC)


I'm glad to meet another Cayce fan, keep up the good work!--Jondel 00:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Gestalt therapy[edit]

Hi. Thanks for contributing to the translation effort on this article. In the future, please don't use babelfish for a straight translation because machine translators (including babelfish) often are unable to detect certain details in grammar. Machine translations frequently introduce errors into the translated result. Please translate by hand to create a more natural prose. Thanks. — J3ff 00:34, August 15, 2005 (UTC)


User:Jenmoa/birthday --User:Jenmoa 01:49, 13 September 2005 (UTC)


Hi Brookie here - just passing through and came across your page! All the best :) The curate's egg 20:26, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Image:Hippolitie Taine.gif has been listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Hippolitie Taine.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Chick Bowen 00:48, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Featured article for December 25th[edit]

I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in my suggested featured article for December 25th: Omnipotence paradox. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-28 08:25


As I've noticed you during RC-patrol, I'll take my life into my hands and hit you with the boilerplate. ;-)

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

Happy editing. Lectonar 10:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi! & my explanation...[edit]

Hi, Lumos3. Thanks for introducing me to Wiki User Talk! I'll have to start using this.

I appreciated your comment on my changing the Psychobabble article's name. But starting today, it needs a parenthetical disambiguation (from this).... I guess I should've noted in that :talk first, but I thought the "Reason for Move" box would take care of it, at least temporarily. (I was fixing the links & double-redirects when you rang.) See you around! Nadirsofar 18:24, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

deletion of pages listing people by sun sign and your help[edit]

hello there. i wonder if i couldn t elicit a helping hand? i ask from very quickly noting that you have contributed to articles here on astrology. i started a few pages i intended as lists of people with wiki pages by their western astrological sun sign. i thought it a useful quick reference for people with a passing interes in astrology. they ve been put up for deletion however. i haven t taken the time i apologise to consider where at all you stand on issues in astrology but on the chance you d support having such list pages (seeCategory:People by astrological sun sign), if i could trouble you for a supporting vote on this matter. if so, please go to People with an Aquarius sun sign and the vote for deletion entry linked to there. either way, best regards, -Mayumashu 18:28, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for re-writing this article. I noticed you started to do so at the same time I added the cleanup tags to the article. It certainly doesn't read like a promo press release now! Mindmatrix 19:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Validity of Astrology Page[edit]

Lumos, I like the last edit you did here. I prefer to lean on the side of balance. Good edit.Theo 00:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Moved here , posted in error on my home page.