User talk:Wing gundam

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

Welcome!

Hello, Wing gundam, 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 discussion 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! PaddyLeahy 18:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Your comment at Theory of Everything[edit]

I saw your comment about the "family tree" of theories. The best place for such comments is on the "Talk" page of the article, which you can access via the discussion tab at the top of each page (but here is a direct link to the talk page relevant in this case: Talk:Theory of everything). So I moved your comment there and provided an answer of sorts. Feel free to respond there. PaddyLeahy 18:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I know, but I had hoped it would be corrected in context. In any case, I posted a reply to your comment. (posted after debate, so impossible to accurately sign)


Speedy deletion of Will Peters[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

A tag has been placed on Will Peters requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Blake01 20:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Naming convention for Baryons[edit]

Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!Thank you!

Now it all makes sense!

Headbomb (talk) 04:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. They seem confusing and ambiguous, but in actuality few people know the structure of the baryon naming system. If i may comment on your work thus far on the article, i notice that you've added various resonance values for certain heavy baryons, i.e. Sigma0(I=1/2) and Sigma0(I=3/2). I would advise against this, as there are actually a great deal isospin values. It is possible that you may be confusing spin and isospin values, as this chart fails to differentiate between the two (an error i have meant to correct for some time).
I do note your impressive progress, as the last time i viewed this article was several months ago, and i found it both missing information and somewhat disorganized. I would recommend not including higher spin values for the various non-nucleons. For a definitive reference on this matter, there is no better authority than the particle data group. Here is a link to their most recent listings: "click me"; also check the citation on the baryonic nomenclature paragraph for their complete 2006 summary, which discusses in full the complete status of particle physics as of 2006 as well as numerous other topics of interest as of its publication. Wing gundam (talk) 05:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I've also remarked that the spin values are confusing, and kinda clutter things up. I first added them because the only difference between a proton and a delta was the different spin value, and thus I felt there was a need to distinguish between say a Xi (1/2) and a Xi(3/2) and so I started listing the 1/2 and 3/2 states for each particle. I'll clean it up sometimes this week and I'll let you distinguish between spin and isospin values as you see fit.

Headbomb (talk) 05:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, i see. The situation you are describing has somewhat confusing origins, and plagued me for months before i worked it out. It arises from the fact that a baryon has in fact three 'spin-like' numbers to be taken into account: spin, isospin I, and spin parity Jp. Spin can vary between resonances of the same letter group, isospin identifies each letter group (and, thus, by definition cannot vary between constituents), and Jp almost invariably varies between resonances (in integer increments off of the spin, interestingly enough).
protons and neutrons, in ground state, have equal spin and isospin, and so do delta baryons, so it may appear that either of these two are used to differentiate between the two. Lambda and sigma's, however, do not. while they both are available in the fractional spins, they are defined by their integer isospins. However, these numbers are sometimes confused or switched, possibly due to the reader, but the sad truth is that more often than not, due to unreliable material, even that of supposedly reliable and/or highly reputable sources. In such cases, the 1/2 and 3/2 values of spins are noticed for sigma/lambda/other heavy baryons, and assumed to play a fundamental differentiation role as they do with protons and neutrons, and listed as fundamental particles, even though they are in fact energized resonances. Hopefully this will make some sense, and guide you in understanding baryons. Wing gundam (talk) 06:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I might also add that it would be unnecessary to list the spin parity number of baryons in addition to the other two, as i think it's identical to the standard spin in the ground state, which is all the list should be listing (there are hundreds of resonances, both confirmed and hypothesized).

Peer review for the List of baryons[edit]

Since you already contributed to that page, I'm letting you know that I requested for a Peer Review. If you want to help, that would be peachy. Headbomb (talk · contribs) 21:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Just dropping a note on your talk page to say hi/bother you. --Corvus coronoides talk 21:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

April 2012[edit]

Hello, and 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 Maxwell's equations, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use your 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. --XonqNopp Tk 11:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, but I already knew it what a bad edit. Naturally it was a mistake. Thats why i reverted it as soon as it was submitted. --Wing gundam (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Ok, but don't forget that when you submit an edit, it immediately becomes visible to everyone consulting the article, and even if you revert it it will always be stored in the history, meaning that everyone can see you did such a weird change. If you only want to see, you can use the Show preview button (actually everyone should use this button before submitting something). If you want to test your edits before submitting to everyone, you should better use your sandbox. Try it ;-) --XonqNopp Tk 06:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

February 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm JudgementSummary. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Wholesale deletion of my work on Clockwork Universe (nearly 80%) in one fell swoop is not conducive to the free and accurate exchange of information championed by wikipedia. Please note that some of the topics are still work in progress and would appreciate your input and will try to come to an accomodation but that, in my opinion, wholesale deletion without a chance to respond, is not right. In any event look forward to working with you in a more productive manner thanks... i.e. the wholesale deletions from 00:17, 22 February 2013‎ Wing gundam(talk | contribs)‎ to 21:38, 21 February 2013‎ Wing gundam(talk | contribs)‎ This is especially true as the article was just now allowed to remain on wikipedia after a week-long discussion about whether it should be eliminated entirely... thanks...

You're right, section blanking with out Talk isn't good practice. Since you've responded I'll bring this up in the Talk. But leave the tags. Wing gundam (talk) 08:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Clockwork universe. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. I don't mean to sound harsh and really do want feedback but to add 10+ objections, wholesale deletions, notices on each and every section with the barest minimum of reasoning is frustrating. It makes it hard to consider exactly what should be done not to mention hard to make any constructive changes to satisfy you points. Please slow down just a little... How about ONE section at a time of your choosing and please note my comments in talk...thanks...JudgementSummary (talk) 16:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC) Please also note that I have left all your notices of objections intact. ThanksJudgementSummary (talk) 16:14, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Enough. Your POV essay/OR does not belong in the Clockwork universe theory article. Wing gundam (talk) 05:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

wing gundam 06:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clockwork universe theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Laws of motion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:46, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Questions about "Wave function collapse" edit 3 March 2013[edit]

Wing gundam,

What source did you get this from:

"'Note that in practice, collapse to a single eigenstate is never observed, as it is impossible to build a measurement apparatus with perfect precision. In these cases, the wave function will partially collapse to a superposition of "close" eigenstates, embodying the imprecision of the measurement.

You put it under "The process of collapse". Where did it come from???

Thanks, Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.65.110 (talk) 05:35, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I remember my quantum professor telling me this when I asked how a wavefunction could evolve after collapsing to a position eigenstate (i.e. a dirac delta function), since it obviously would no longer be first order differentiable, so the Schrödinger equation can't really act on it. (Concordantly, the Fourier transform/momentum-space wavefunction would be a flat line). Good point though, that's a really common misconception, and it should be sourced. That sentence should also specify that this imprecision is *not* the same as the fundamental "uncertainty" that results from incompatible operators. Lemme dig up the page number from my quantum textbook (Feel free to add yours if you want) —wing gundam 07:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orchestrated objective reduction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bose-Einstein (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 23:22, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Moving the goalposts.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Moving the goalposts.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:37, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! —wing gundam 03:47, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Moving the goalposts.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Moving the goalposts.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Your recent edits to Ape[edit]

Please see Talk:Ape/Archive 1#Changes to "Historical and modern terminology" section. If you still want to alter the nature of this section, please seek consensus there first. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request[edit]

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Illinois River Energy[edit]

Hello Wing gundam,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Illinois River Energy for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Sulfurboy (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited HRAS, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GTP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited OpenGL, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Qt and SDL. 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) 09:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Top type, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haskell. 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) 11:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Memory management may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"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:
  • language)|Mercury]], and compile-time reference counting in [[ATS (programming language)|ATS]]).

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Invitation[edit]

A gummi bear holding a sign that says "Thank you"
Thank you for using VisualEditor and sharing your ideas with the developers.

Hello, Wing gundam,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of PureScript for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PureScript is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PureScript until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ― Padenton|   15:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Point-to-Point Protocol, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages MPPC and MPPE (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zero-configuration networking, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ubuntu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:50, 23 October 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) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Mary Sue[edit]

I'm not sure where we're at in the WP:BRD cycle - I would appreciate a response to my question here, which I left just over a week ago, about how you reached the conclusion that Scodari's work was WP:NPOV and needed to be removed. I had earlier discussed with another user about how Scodari's work was used in slash literature reviews (and is thus a noted 'anti' view). I would in particular appreciate reliable sources, suitable for inclusion in the article for your assertion that ""Mary Sue" is commonly used to describe major characters, male and female, that are "over the top". " Thanks for your participation. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 03:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Wing gundam. 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)

April 2017[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Emma Morano. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Marbe166 (talk) 21:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)