User talk:Neils51

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

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Neils51, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 17:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

"Amount"?[edit]

Hey, I see that you have massively been changing "amount" to "number" in a large amount of cases, just citing "grammar" as your edit summary. Could you point out in how far "amount" is improper grammar? Lordtobi () 15:40, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

@Lordtobi: Hi Lordtobi, what an excellent question and thanks for noticing! Basically, ‘number’ is used with countable nouns and ‘amount’ with non-countable nouns. For example, you mentioned, an 'amount of cases'. The cases are countable so that should be 'number of cases'. There is one typical exception and that is with money. We speak of an ‘amount’ of money. Technically I suppose it is ‘usage’ however I would consider usage to come under the ‘grammar’ umbrella term. There are a number of references that you can use that discuss correct usage. A quick synopsis from the Cambridge Dictionary may be found here: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/amount-of-number-of-or-quantity-of Many of the competent style guides are listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_guide A discussion on mass nouns here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun For example; there is an amount of cutlery on the table which is made up of a number of knives and forks. A discussion here on ‘number’: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity (refer the section; ‘Quantity in Natural Language’) and ‘amount’ usage is also discussed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_with_disputed_usage Neils51 (talk) 12:17, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

You cannot change it when it is a part of a quote. It the person being quoted said "amount", we can't change the quote. Please be more careful. -- Ssilvers (talk) 08:30, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely! Oops! I missed those quote marks! Thanks for the pickup. Neils51 (talk) 09:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Copyeditor Barnstar Hires.png The Copyeditor's Barnstar
Well done, for going above and beyond, on fixing a mountain of spelling and copy mistakes on the General der Nachrichtenaufklärung article. Thanks. scope_creep (talk) 23:01, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Thank you Scope creep. Much appreciated! Neils51 (talk) 23:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, Neils51. 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)

Merry Christmas[edit]

Hi Neils51, Merry Christmas to you and your family. I hope you have a great New Year. scope_creep (talk) 13:58, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Counting the hours[edit]

It's not a big deal, and I respect your differing opinion on hours being a countable noun, but quantities that are non-integers are normally expressed as "amount of", rather than "number of" (similarly for "less than" vs "fewer than"). In the case of dive logs, most dives last less than an hour, so total time is accumulated in minutes and will either be expressed as something like "5.3 hours" or "5 hours 18 minutes", and so on. Once fractions are part of the quantity being measured, the idea of 1 hour, 2 hours, etc. goes out of the window. Nevertheless, I'm happy with your last edit, as we can both agree that time isn't a countable noun. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 13:08, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

BoNM Germany Hires.png German Barnstar of National Merit
For your work with editor Scope creep on Ferdinand Feichtner, the Coordinator of WikiProject Germany awards you the German Barnstar of National Merit. Sehr gut! Vami_IV✠ 00:10, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure![edit]

TWA guide left bottom.png
Hi Neils51! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 06:18, Thursday, March 29, 2018 (UTC)

Get Help
About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

The use of Template:contrib-ta1[edit]

Hello. I removed the {{contrib-ta1}} tag you'd placed on an article. The contrib-xx1 tags are intended for placement on users' talk pages, not on articles. Thanks. Largoplazo (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: thanks for that. I see the article has been deleted, which is as should be. Neils51 (talk) 23:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:As of#"As at"[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:As of#"As at". 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 10:34, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Handball Message[edit]

Thanks for your message about handball/King Ping. I do have an account, but usually edit as an IP address, because receiving alerts about reversions like the one in question is too depressing. 101.164.149.18 (talk) 01:47, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

WP teahouse logo 3.png
Hello, Neils51. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived. Message added by DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:49, 1 May 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.

Aziz Behich[edit]

You made a mistake. That's what everyone is calling him now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.18.192.246 (talk) 02:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

@210.18.192.246: Hi, and thanks for the feedback. Even if it is quite common to apply this nickname (not one that I would want), it still needs to be referenced or sourced. Do you know of a suitable source that can be referenced? Neils51 (talk) 02:29, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Atomic Broadcast[edit]

The IP user changed "deliver" everywhere I had used it to "receive". Is that better? Not clear. "Deliver" is the verb used in the Defago, Schiper, and Urban paper (reference 2) in defining Total Order Broadcast, and I followed that. More precisely, Defago, et al state the conditions in terms of "TO-Deliver" (Total Order-Deliver) and it is a technical term for them. Whether "TO-Deliver" is closer to plain old "deliver" or to plain old "receive", I will have to think over. As someone who has actually implemented distributed computing systems, including Atomic Broadcast, my inclination is towards "deliver", because it seems to capture the essential point of "receiving the broadcast and committing it" better than just "receive". Also, since the TO conditions in the article are cited to the Defago paper, maybe we should be using the terminology of the paper. Don't you think? By the way, you seem to be setting yourself up as some kind of arbiter of who knows enough to be editing this article, and threatening to revert if I don't satisfy you. This is, "shall we say", somewhat on the obnoxious side. Might want to work on your wording a little, if you make a regular habit of this. So thanks for the "opportunity" to respond, but when did I start being responsible to you? Person54 (talk) 19:12, 10 July 2018 (UTC)