User talk:MaxEnt

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

Personal wiki[edit]

Greetings MaxEnt! You mention on your userpage that you run a personal MediaWiki for notetaking. May I ask, what is your operating system, and what was your strategy for setting up such as system? I have a non-technical mind for these things. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 21:45, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fundamental interaction may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • via gravitation and electromagnetism. The strong interaction, synthesizing [[chemical elements]][[ via [[nuclear fusion]] within [[star]]s, holds together the [[atom]]'s [[atomic nucleus|nucleus]],

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:04, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Visual system[edit]

Hi. You appear to have some expertise in the visual system. I've been bothered for some time about the definition of "visual"! Back in the day, there were rods and cones and visual had to do with sight. Full stop. Then came chronobiology and later knowledge of intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells which have (almost) nothing to do with sight. I see the word visual used to include these 'new' cells and the work they do. But I also see this 'new' system described as non-visual.

According to the article visual system, Wikipedia clearly means that all of it is 'visual'. Is it simply wrong to refer to "non-visual" functions of the eyes & optic nerve etc.? That feels non-intuitive to me. I feel that vision = visual perception = sight.

(You needn't bother with this if you don't have time as it's borderline related to editing the encyclopedia.) --Hordaland (talk) 16:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your interesting (and amusing) reply!!
"One could argue that circadian regulation itself almost deserves to be regarded as a part of the visual system: we track night and day for the in large measure for the sake of synchronizing our wakefulness with optimal seeing conditions." Yes, and circadian regulation certainly appeared (long) before vision/sight. --Hordaland (talk) 16:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Letter frequency, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English. 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) 08:57, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed Merger[edit]

Merger discussion for high-intensity interval training[edit]

Merge-arrows.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, high-intensity interval training , has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Sharp-shinned.hawk (talk) 13:12, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roger Schank, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cognitivist. 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) 11:55, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited CouchDB, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Erlang. 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) 10:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rexall Place, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jason Smith. 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) 11:29, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Steven Poole, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scribner. 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) 09:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Omni-Path, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seagate. 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) 11:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 31 October[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, MaxEnt. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Interrupt handler[edit]

Please add more references for your large amount of new text that you added to Interrupt handler article. • SbmeirowTalk • 09:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Feel free to revert any and all of my un-referenced additions to interrupt handler if you think that improves the article over how it now stands.
Note that the previous scope of the article was insufficient, whether referenced or not referenced. If the goal here is to arrive at a sufficient article, which should come first? Clearly this article wasn't attracting necessary editorial attention in its previous form.
It would take me an entire day to hunt down references for what I learned over thirty years of working on microcontrollers off and on. I don't have that day for this project. I do hunt down references all the time for my smaller edits, because on those edits I'm learning as I go, rather than restudying material I already know cold.
I've already put a dated comment in the talk page concerning my large addition. If this work is reverted in toto, an enterprising future editor can still dig it up and salvage anything of merit.
My preference is that someday pares the new text down by about 30% so that any OR inherent from my too many decades of history is less self-evident, while also leaving it obvious that the new scope deserves a better high-level organization. In the profession of editing, structural editing is a different job description from content editing. The hope here is that such a person comes along. The previous version failed to attract content editors, so personally, I would try out this new approach for a while to see how it goes. — MaxEnt 17:37, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
For all edits, it is your responsibility to add references, per Wikipedia:Citing sources. I don't remember any rules that say a person can ignore the rule, just because it takes a bunch of your time to do it. Wikipedia isn't a blog where we post life knowledge and life experience, because that would fall under WP:USERGENERATED and/or Wikipedia:No original research. Remember that Wikipedia must meet Wikipedia:Verifiability. Obviously, a person doesn't need to add a reference after every sentence, but at the same time "no references" or few doesn't pass the guidelines either. • SbmeirowTalk • 17:54, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
And that's why I'm cool with the next person A) helping my work over the bar, or B) burying it six feet under. I'm not flouting policy, I'm just taking a different short-term view of division of labour. There's an analogy here with the evolutionary developmental biology. People tend to forget the "devo" part, yet no evolutionary adaptation is viable without also having a viable development process (this was probably discussed in a video discussion between Dawkins and Steven Rose, where I realized that I was guilty as charged, and had also fallen into this particular state of sin). In my opinion, Wikipedia culture is a little bit too heavy on the "evo" side, and ignores the "devo" side, leading to a lot of articles meeting the dress code, but not the need. I'm in complete agreement with the Wikipedia standards for articles that actually get there. So either a process begins to bring my addition into conformity (an ultimate evo standard with which I wholly agree), or it gets immediately removed (a devo standard which I regard as short-sighted).
As for the problem with a few, look at this, it's typical of what's broadly available:
It dives right into the kind of gory detail that already makes this article too technical for casual neophytes. I'd have to wade through bushels of this kind of prose with tweezers, to pick out one sentence from each that takes a higher level view. I don't think that randomly scattering a few of these into the article improves matters (though it might superficially appear to do so), and what it would take for me to filter this down to where it would improve matters lies well beyond the scope of my enthusiasm. — MaxEnt 18:13, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Slave trade[edit]

I have reverted your edit to Slave trade for a number of reasons. First, please do not turn an existing redirect with incoming links into a disambiguation page without discussion and consensus for such a change. Editors often make links using redirects with the expectation that the redirect target will be on the other end, and it is unfair to these editors to change that target without alerting the community. Second, when consensus exists for such a change, it is expected that incoming links will be fixed before the nature of the page is changed, to avoid disrupting the systems that report disambiguation links. Third, this is very clearly a WP:DABCONCEPT, and not an ambiguous topic at all. Your page merely listed different routes or kinds of slave trade, and did not disambiguate anything. It was therefore incorrect and a misapplication of disambiguation guidelines to create this page, which you would probably have discovered from a discussion on the matter. bd2412 T 19:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

You're completely right. My apologies. In the moment, it just didn't occur to me that slave trade could serve as a useful inbound link to history of slavery. I just assumed someone had made the link long ago, and it was basically moribund. This is actually a classic cognitive error. Almost all of my driving incidents occur when I fail to realize that another driver might make a weird choice, because I would never make such a choice myself. My gut response to slave trade being used as an active, inbound link to history of slavery was that it was simply too weird and dysfunctional to exist if anyone else with a working brain knew about it (read what I just said carefully: quite simply—now that you've reminded me to think from above—my gut was in the wrong). Also when driving on the public roadways, I need to rein in my false assumptions, as I clearly failed to do here. — MaxEnt 19:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
I do think that we could have an article on the slave trade itself, as a broad topic. I recently created Slave market in response to a similar concern. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
That's an excellent addition. Cheers! to you too.
By the way, I propose template {{sad-reality-redirect}}, expanding to: Slave trade redirects here; it probably shouldn't but it does. Likewise the slave trade redirect page itself could contain text (or an HTML comment) to warn the next speedy dunderhead that this is, for the time being, a known sand trap. Less facetiously, one could hat note—perhaps at section level: "slave trade redirects here; for specific slave trades, see slave trade (disambiguation)."
As I explained, I was only into this to address (what I falsely perceived to be) a minor bit rot, and now that I know this is live ammunition, I'll leave the next step to those who regularly edit in this dank pond of human history. — MaxEnt 21:23, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Recent edit at DVI[edit]

I left your recent edit alone for now, but it should really be sourced when you have a moment. I don't doubt that it's true, but since this article is lacking proper sourcing all over the place, the last thing we want to do is contribute to the mess. Thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:50, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

On a quick search for whether dual-link permitted running separately displays via a splitter, the references I could source spoke about the use of the DMS-59 for this purpose. Here's what you end up with:

DVI supports dual-link. ... Using DVI, you can drive two displays off one DMS-59 connector, but this is not dependent on dual-link.[citation provided]

Is this weird non-sequitur an improvement?
Finding a quick source on splitting dual-link DVI suffers from the problem that apparently it can't be done by any normal means, so HOWTO space is a little thin.
Citations are great. I care about the befuddled reader first and foremost. Wikipedia suffers from stiff-upper-lip syndrome. We aren't allowed to say "if you search for dual-link DVI splitters you won't find much (as of June 2017), infer from this what you will". So between the two edicts, we just leave the hapless reader running around blind in negative space (that which is not spoken about can be neither cited nor its absence mentioned).
I put the DMS-59 link in there because people like me remember having using a single DVI connector to split displays once upon a time. Once the ball lands on an oddball connector, it resets my supposition that today's dual-link is perhaps the same thing.
I realize I have no authority if another editor reverses my change for the reasons given. But at the end of the day, I'm happier this damage to the reader wasn't done on my part (just because a policy makes sense under the hood, doesn't mean the reader benefits).
While I do see this as mildly increasing the editorial mess, I also see this as decreasing substandard service to the end reader. Probably a great deal of the rest of the editorial mess has less justification (because good citations actually exist for most facets of the treatment).
Finally, there's opportunity cost. Ten minutes here and there scouring for an elusive citation in what's obviously a negative space subtracts from other forms of contribution where my time is better invested.
TLDR patois: I've looked at this from both sides now, and it's the cloud's confusion I forestall. — MaxEnt 18:16, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
OK, I think I realize where the confusion is now. You are making a statement explaining that the term "dual-link" does not mean DVI can be split into two separate DVI signals to two separate DVI monitors. While that is true, it's not necessary to point this out to the reader. You are assuming that the reader might interpret dual meaning two displays, but the term dual link is clearly explained in the following section: Digital Visual Interface#Connector. There should be no confusion, and your edit is just a redundant statement. Therefore, I've decided to remove it. If you want to discuss this further, then lets take it to the article's talk page. Thanks. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

November 2016[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of apex predators. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Cavalryman V31 (talk) 00:28, 15 November 2017 (UTC).

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, MaxEnt. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Marginal electric grid thinking at electric car.[edit]

If I switch on a light, clearly 0% of that comes from renewable sources like wind and solar; because they haven't reacted to the light, they just put out a continuous amount of power, based on the weather etc. so there's no marginal contribution from renewables, and it's just the fossil power that takes up the slack!

Likewise if I plug an electric car in, *none* of that electricity comes from renewables!

And by extension, since all of the electricity in my house gets switched on sometime, none of the electricity in my house ever comes from renewables!

Clearly something is wrong with that logic. When you work out what it is, you'll understand what is wrong with the section you added to the talk page at Talk:electric car.GliderMaven (talk) 23:32, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Stamp collecting[edit]

What reliable sources do you for adding this prose? ww2censor (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Viola[edit]

Sorry to intrude but I saw this and had to ask - pansy or stringy thing?? :) Cheers DBaK (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, MaxEnt. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dmitry Klokov, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Cohen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Heinrich Scholz[edit]

Hi @MaxEnt: Welcome to Wikipedia!! I removed that tone tag, as the page has been copyedited fully 8 times and both statements are referenced. As a a middle-aged, white male from a G7 economy with a long career in a STEM profession, I am curious as to why you think the tone is needed. scope_creepTalk 01:15, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Jared Diamond[edit]

Just noticed your edit. I think the article is unbalanced and far too positive. I'm pretty sure there is substantial criticism of Guns, Germs, and Steel but have never had the time to do any research on it. Which is bad of me because if I'm right we are probably over-using it as a source. Doug Weller talk 10:41, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Podcast, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Media (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 16:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)