Jump to content

User talk:Georgewilliamherbert: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Project Orion: ok, eventually
Line 177: Line 177:
:::Ahh... Ok. Good enough for now, perhsps start a talk page discussion on the article talk page to work out how we proceed.
:::Ahh... Ok. Good enough for now, perhsps start a talk page discussion on the article talk page to work out how we proceed.
:::I am not entirely happy with it now, but it's not your fault, and it's not worth urgently trying to fix it. Eventually is good enough. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] ([[User talk:Georgewilliamherbert#top|talk]]) 19:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
:::I am not entirely happy with it now, but it's not your fault, and it's not worth urgently trying to fix it. Eventually is good enough. [[User:Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]] ([[User talk:Georgewilliamherbert#top|talk]]) 19:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

::::I've edited the article to make it clear the Ivy Mike comparison is not perfect. Hopefully that will do for now?
::::[[Special:Contributions/86.46.191.135|86.46.191.135]] ([[User talk:86.46.191.135|talk]]) 20:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:01, 13 January 2014

Hi, I'm George. Feel free to leave me a new message!

Forgot to say earlier

It is a pleasure working with you again.--Tznkai (talk) 11:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. And me with you, as well. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 11:28, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gilabrand

Just, as the closer of a recent AE case concerning Gilabrand, notifying you of this.     ←   ZScarpia   19:02, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Try harder

Are you all really so ignorant of real world standard practices with these things?

Nope. Do you really think couching an insult in question form is actually clever? Are you really so eager to provide solutions in search of problems by importing what even you imply are stupid real-world standards in your normally officious way? Wait, I think I already know the answers to both.
I voted for you for ArbCom: I already regret it. --Calton | Talk 15:42, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ADDENDUM: You were trolled. You took the bait. Are you all really so ignorant of real-world standard practices with these things? --Calton | Talk 15:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I knew I'd been trolled last night, and said so. We still don't know if it was photoshopped or not, but may well have been. Doesn't change that a bunch of Wikipedians' first impulses were unacceptable customer service attitude. My apologies if insisting that we treat complaints as valid (or, at least, sincere) until we have proof otherwise seems wrong to you. I can't impose my standards on the mob. But I can tell you, most of those who responded would get fired for that behavior in any real customer service or web operations setting. If treating people with respect initially is officious, I plead guilty.
Try harder. It matters. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:50, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks George! Hopefully that will resolve the situation. ElKevbo (talk) 00:50, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message, just a nit: IP addresses cannot send mail, so there's no access to revoke. LFaraone 07:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"smiting"

Hello GWH. As you know, I commend you for reminding editors and the closing Admin at the MilesMoney/TFD ANI of the requirements of CBAN. However, I'm concerned about your recent reference to MM and his use of "smiting" on his talk page. He's not talking about himself "smiting" anybody. He's referring to his perception as to the operating methods of Arbcom, should he need to file a case there. What concerns me is that a reader of your comment (and believe me I understand that you have reason to feel frustrated by Miles' feisty responses to various messages) would infer from your remarks that Miles has somewhere threatened to rain death and destruction of Biblical proportions on other editors or WP -- "smiting" them. It's pretty clear to me that in the context of his remark he was saying no such thing. Unfortunately editors throughout WP seem to skim comments and retain whatever strikes their attention and for this reason it's unfortunate that some readers might infer that MM is prepared to go on some kind of rampage. SPECIFICO talk 15:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will re-read, but that is what I thought he meant by it (him doing that). If I misread I will strike and apologize. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 18:08, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(for the record, for anyone reading here - I had mis-read MilesMoney's remark rather badly last night, and apologized on his talk page and struck the specific comment items that derived from that mis-reading. He had not threatened to smite anyone. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 04:59, 4 January 2014 (UTC) )[reply]

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
It's not the prettiest barnstar, but it seems to be the right one.

For diligent and principled execution of the Admin's mandate. SPECIFICO talk 05:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hi, George.

I pretty much (well, entirely) welcome part (1) of your proposed interaction ban. I don't think you are acting in bad faith, although I am not sure you are acting in full knowledge with your other proposed actions. Given my apparent issues with TRM, believe me, I don't think any topic ban is necessary in his regard, mine, or anyone else's. I've asked for the same interaction ban you have myself. I think it will work wonders, and hope it is established asap.

μηδείς (talk) 06:08, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ya know, old pal, TRM was already off my radar, in my self-imposed interaction ban, until you resurrected this topic again at ANI. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots17:38, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just to complete your unholy triumvirate, thanks so much for the breakfast block, your bad etc. Never mind, perhaps you'll find your name in lights after this disastrously phrased ANI passes out due to general apathy. A nice try, but all in all, a wholesale waste of time as it utterly fails to address the nub of the problem. Cheers for trying though. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Tesla Roadster for you!

A Tesla Roadster for you!
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! Gg53000 (talk) 00:58, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Ahhhh. Ooh.
I commute past the Milpitas factory (ex-NUUMI) every day, and there are Model S's out test-driving all over when I do. I used to commute past their corporate HQ up in Palo Alto, and for kicks would blast past at around 9000 RPM in my RX-8. But I'd take a Model S, and drive it like it's supposed to be driven.
If I fit. Which at 6'5" is in question.
But, appreciated!...
Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:06, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review requested

Hello recently somebody asked here, the same place I was earlier complained about somebody requested for rev del of the talk page's history. I don't remember if I inserted her name in the talk page or not but still I request you take a look at this case and review it. Thank you. KahnJohn27 (talk) 05:41, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think they are referring to deleting the revisions of my article since they contain the name of the daughter. KahnJohn27 (talk) 06:01, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've got

email. Dougweller (talk) 15:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody out of the mixed metaphor

Thanks for the very high quality close at Talk:Comparison of S.M.A.R.T. tools, though I might have left a bit more time for others to reply, since my late response was so late. But yeah, the sell-by date passed. --Lexein (talk) 11:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

Hello George, I see the car-crash of an RFC you launched has been archived, presumably out of 'bot boredom staring at a thread with no further interest. I'm sure you would prefer to see this properly concluded so perhaps you could nudge one of your competent buddies to look into closing it appropriately. And no need to apologise for the false block, misread threads etc... these things happen to some admins. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed that... I listed it at Requests for Closure (the thing transcluded into the top of the main WP:AN) yesterday for this reason. Yes, it's not helpful to have it archived without someone closing.
I will re-note it at the main AN requesting a closure if nobody gets to it in a day or two...
I did apologize and was trying to apologize again when you nuked the section of your talk page, so I left it alone.
Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:17, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 January 2014

Hi

Just to let you know that user The Rambling Man called me "sick" today. I find his behavior strange for an experienced user.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:23, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because you implied that me stating the death of a girl through cancer was "beneath me". You got it wrong BabbaQ, so very wrong. You were told as much by other editors. Now stop forum shopping. It achieves nothing, but makes you look silly. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As you misunderstood my comment as I did not mention Eva Ekvall at all I think it is time for you to go back and check through the messages again. I messaged you about your in my opinion inappropriate comment about Monica Spear, while you went on a tirade about Eva Ekvall. I have asked George about input on your comment about me being "sick" now user Drmies got to it first and he agreed with me that you were out of line. I still aksed for georges opinion about your comment which is within my rights. You are the one looking silly. Misunderstanding comments and going on tantrum-fueled tirades. Move on. You made a mistake and you can not own up to it.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please swallow your pride and move on.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, time for you to check again. You said this comment was "beneath me". That my comment that a girl who died early from cancer was "tragic" is "beneath me"? Oh dear. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clear case of you not wanting/willing to understand that it is the entire comment which is inappropriate. It is not my problem if you misunderstands and goes on a tantrum filled tirade. Sorry but I do not take responsibility for your actions. :)--BabbaQ (talk) 16:33, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why link to part of the comment then? Your mistake. And you've been advised such by others. Bye! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, its not my problem if YOU mistunderstands the link. And then goes off on that:) take some responsibility mate. Bye!--BabbaQ (talk) 16:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One-line message

Hello, Georgewilliamherbert. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Jeh (talk) 12:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A request

Could you or any other administrator please block my account for two months when my AE request is closed, regardless to AE decision (and annotate this block as block made by my own request). I have had enough, but unfortunately can not stop editing myself because of my addiction. Thank you very much in advance, My very best wishes (talk) 14:57, 12 January 2014 (UTC)<[reply]

(talk page stalker) Sorry to hear it, MVBW. I'll block you if you wish. Please read my terms carefully and confirm on my page or by e-mail that you accept them. Perhaps you might as well wait until the AE request actually is closed, both to make sure you don't change your mind in the meantime, and to save me keeping a lookout for it. In any case, I always like to leave a bit of reconsideration time after the first request for a block.
George, please just send me off with a flea in my ear if you prefer to handle MVBW's request yourself, but I noticed you're not listed in the category. Bishonen | talk 16:42, 12 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Yeh, I just noticed last comment by Sandstein on AE. Given that, I completely withdraw this request. My very best wishes (talk) 18:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question...

Supposing I was in a mutual interaction ban with someone, would one of us following the other's edits and making corrections qualify as a violation? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots15:41, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question... 2

Supposing one of the other two editors gave erroneous answers at the ref desk, would one us be able to correct this? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I, for one, welcome fact corrections. When Cuddlyable3 was driving everyone else crazy with petty corrections to other users' grammar and spelling, I invited Cuddly to repair mine on sight. I would welcome your own corrections. Just not the attendant personal attacks. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots16:51, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well it appears the interaction ban would prevent that (both the corrections and the attendant personal attacks)... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brief break

I am not ignoring all of you who have posted above in the last 24-48 hrs. I still have a fever and am sufficiently grumpy as to not think rendering any public opinions is wise at the moment, other than that Bish on my talkpage is absolutely fine (though the specific incident seems self-resolved). Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 02:00, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Ivy Mike comparison was made as the article (before I edited it today) stated that the combined yield to orbit would be 10 megatons. As Ivy Mike's yield of ~10.4 was ~70% fission, I thought the Ivy Mike comparison would help readers put "10 megaton of fission fallout" into perspective. You disagree? A number of Soviet atmospheric to HANE shots were conducted in the ~20 megaton range that would be an even more apt comparison as they were airbursts and produced about 50% of their yield via fission reactions, but there is very little in the way of English sources that discuss them, and there is no wiki article to link to. 86.46.191.135 (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on which sized Orion, and with which pusher bombs; not your fault, but the article glosses that over badly. The exoatmospheric horizontal thrust component fallout half escapes Earth as well, and that's much of the total pulse usage. So flight profile matters as well.
You aren't wrong, but it's not simple, and I'm worried that a simple comparison makes it seem simpler than it is. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 19:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, however the article does make it clear that it's the 4000 to 5000 ton sized Orion vehicle and the fallout from that vehicle would be mostly the global fallout from airburst explosions and HANE, therefore not directly comparable to the surface burst Ivy Mike. But, the article does say that it is a kind of worst case "pessimistic comparison", which it is. How do you think we should proceed?
86.46.191.135 (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh... Ok. Good enough for now, perhsps start a talk page discussion on the article talk page to work out how we proceed.
I am not entirely happy with it now, but it's not your fault, and it's not worth urgently trying to fix it. Eventually is good enough. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited the article to make it clear the Ivy Mike comparison is not perfect. Hopefully that will do for now?
86.46.191.135 (talk) 20:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]