User talk:Hertz1888

Responses will be given on this page to all inquiries left on this page. If you would like me to respond on your talk page, please say so explicitly. Please post new messages at the bottom of the page.

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 /Archive 7 /Archive 8 /Archive 9

Welcome!

Hello Hertz1888! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 10:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC) Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Thanks - Astronomical thought for the day

I'm going to quote this from Talk:Solar_radiation and use it in my physics class today:

“Astronomical numbers are so mind-boggling, it's hard to imagine how any human can handle them. Manipulate, yes—but truly grasp? And yet, as far as we know, human consciousness is the best resource the universe has for being aware of itself!” Hertz1888 04:31, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I happened upon your comment after reading up on Ackermann’s function and Graham’s number, so pure math had me primed for this sentiment.

--Thanks! Dc3 (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Primed ... Get it? EEng (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

I didn't get it before; my advanced math skills are not up to the caliber of yours. But I see now there may have been a pun intended, and I send you countless thanks for pointing it out, not too late even after seven years. Hertz1888 (talk) 22:42, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

nsaum75 ^¡שיחת! wishes you peace!

Shalom

nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} has given you a falafel sandwich! Falafel sandwiches are a specialty of the Middle East. With a little tahini and maybe a spicy sauce, they are delicious and promote WikiLove. Hopefully, this one has added flavor to your day.

Spread the goodness of falafel by adding {{subst:Falafel}} to someone's Talk page with a friendly message! Give a falafel sandwich to someone you've had disagreements with in the past, or to a good friend.

nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 21:10, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! It has indeed added flavor. Yum! "Eat hummus. Give chick peas a chance." (author unknown). Hertz1888 (talk) 21:26, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I came across this article and thought I would share it with you, as it seems to touch on areas you occasionally edit. Warm Regards, -- nsaum75 ^{!Dígame¡‎} 04:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

תיקון עולם

Peace is nothing more than a lull in a battle; a time during which each side steps back in order to tend their wounds and refine their fighting techniques. Sadly, the best we can hope for in olam ha'zeh is a momentary stalemate. However we must never forget tikkun olam. For our reality is nothing but a boat adrift on water, balanced by permanent uncertainty... --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 05:14, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

The one sided nature of things here gets really old. Its sad to watch. Transgressions should be punished, but equally so. --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 05:17, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for all the editings !!! Bambiker (talk) 11:16, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Planetary tides

This idea is often brought up, for the simple reason that the beat frequency of the Jupiter and Saturn orbits more or less matches the length of the solar cycle. However when analyzed in detail, and there is literature beyond what's in New Scientist, the tidal forces have been shown to be utterly negligible relative to the body forces in the convection zone that drive the dynamo and hence make sunspots. I couldn't read the New Scientist article on line, but I did check out the other reference and found it to be based on an obviously flawed report that never got published. Hugh Hudson (talk) 20:12, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Clearly much more to this than I ever imagined. I respect your analysis. Thanks for sharing it with me. Hertz1888 (talk) 21:02, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Hertz1888! I hope you enjoy this cookie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 01:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Yum! Thanks! And it's completely unexpected. Great collection of quotes on your user page. Well chosen! Hertz1888 (talk) 01:37, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Hertz1888. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 14:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thoughts requested about a merge

I'm thinking about merging Out of Town News into Harvard Square Subway Kiosk. For all intents and purposes they're one and the same these days; OOTN news doesn't have much history to speak of before it moved into the kiosk, so it'd do better as a section in the kiosk article. I wanted to ping you since you're the only one who's done any substantial work on either this decade; if you agree then it certainly doesn't need a formal discussion, and if you don't I probably won't touch them. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:31, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. It sounds to me like a great idea, completely reasonable, with no wider discussion needed. What's not to like? Cheers to you. Hertz1888 (talk) 20:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Great, I'll merge them sometime soon. Another likely merge where you're the primary editor: Somerville Junction into Lowell Street (MBTA station). Lowell Street is currently one sentence, but it'll get rather longer as I add construction and planning information as part of a general expansion of GLX articles. Somerville Junction is likely to be a perma-stub if not merged; you've already added just about all there is to add to it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. Will reply soon! Hertz1888 (talk) 14:42, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

What you say about the Junction article being about maxed out is certainly true, and it makes some sense to make one longer article out of the two shorter ones. However, I should think you would need to tie the subjects together somehow, as the locations are only in the same general area. The sites of the former and new stations are more than 1/4 mile apart (almost 0.5 km), and the Lowell St. station site is well beyond the former wye in the tracks (the actual junction). If you can solidly relate the subjects to each other, I certainly have no objection to a merger; in fact, thanks for taking it on. Best wishes, Hertz1888 (talk) 22:29, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

You are certainly right that they're a bit further spread out than most stations to be collectively considered. However, I do believe they tie together fairly well. The track junction was closer to Lowell Street than to the former station itself, and the distance between Central and Lowell Streets is barely half of the distance from either to the next station (North Somerville / Ball Square @ Broadway, Somerville Highlands @ Hancock, Winter Hill / Gilman Square @ Medford). They're literally tied together by Somerville Junction Park and the Community Path, and I believe that the former factory (now the Maxwells Green site adjacent to the station) was located there specifically for the junction. So there's enough linking them that I believe it'd be a better single article than two shorter articles. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I cannot find any evidence of it at current, but I swear I've also seen somewhere that very early on in the GLX (draft Beyond Lechmere report, perhaps) they were considering a station between the two cross streets with access from both. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:27, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Ping? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:41, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Just Ping? Hertz1888 (talk) 01:42, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Have you any thoughts about what I said? I hope to be working on the GLX articles soon and I would like to merge then if possible. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realize you were awaiting a response. You've made a strong case for bundling the junction articles together, and the kiosk articles merger is a no-brainer. By all means, please proceed with both, with my encouragement. I will be looking forward to the results. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:05, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

I understand my mistakes, thanks for the message!! Will do better, promise. SmokethatWeed123 (talk) 20:51, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Great image!

Look at the image here [1] (you really need to click on the 20MB version to see it clearly, but it's worth it). It's a view from the corner of Quincy and Kirland, looking down Kirkland toward where Science Ctr is now, with Mem Hall on the left, and a horsecart in the foreground. What you don't see until you zoom in really close is that there's also a water cart, like they used to use to keep down dust in the streets, and they're filling it at an elevated hydrant. It's really charming. EEng (talk) 02:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

Hello Hertz1888: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:00, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Mount Zion

Please do not revert my edits before reading the edit summary. There are topographic standards for describing Geographic features. One of these, also given in the Wikiepdia hill article, is that any elevation over 610m above sea level is considered a mountain, even if a low one. Moreover, in this case the mountain has two peaks (see also UIAA definition, divided by a ravine, commonly refereed to as a Saddle (landform). In fact the current ravine is much shallower than the original form because it had been filled in to elevate the peak. And, the reference provided does not use capitals to identify the features as Geographic, but refers to them as topographic features, i.e. western and eastern. Crock81 (talk) 10:41, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I had read the edit summary. I just did not buy it. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

As seen in the subsequent edit histor, you seem to be alone in this view. EEng 13:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Given there are only two editors participating, this is unsurprising mathematics.

See talk there Crock81 (talk) 01:04, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Responded to there. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

But the point remains that your argument is not only OR, it's not backed up by the very article you cite, Hill, which gives at best conflicting definitions. We follow the sources. EEng 03:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

portmanteau -- that cracked me up

Thanks for your Amtrak edit. :) "Dumbing down" is why the United States is where we're at. :) Damotclese (talk) 15:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Abebe with daughter at the 1964 Olympics

I think the caption is an incorrect translation the original from Japanese website. Source caption reads: 選手村でのアベベ親子 選手村でくつろぐアベベ親子。家族思いでも有名だった。Google translates this as: "Abebe parent and child in the athlete village Abebe parents child relaxing at the athletes village. It was famous even for my family thought." Are you ok with me changing the captions in the image and article to "child" until i can find definitive proof of sex? — አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 23:51, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh yes, please proceed. No need for me to make a fuss over this. I agree that "child" is a prudent wording for now, as I am not entirely convinced from the photo that this child is a girl. I am impressed by your diligent research. Best wishes. Hertz1888 (talk) 00:10, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for asking – and for the formatting above. Hertz1888 (talk) 00:21, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Hertz1888 Could I solicit you to do a thorough c/e or maybe even a peer-review of this article. —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 22:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll have a look and see what grooming I can do. Hertz1888 (talk) 01:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh Hertz, looks and fashion are so overrated! EEng 02:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Not to mention breeding. Hertz1888 (talk) 02:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

@Hertz1888:, I am considering skipping the peer-review and skipping straight to GA nomination. Any thoughts? —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 20:35, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

@Janweh64: Sorry, I am not well-informed on these matters. Perhaps @EEng:, who is more knowledgeable, can advise. I think the large number of red links may raise objections, but am not sure of that. Hertz1888 (talk) 05:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

From a quick glance I think it's ready for GA, so I wouldn't bother with the peer review. However, the GA process is very backed up and I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Good work on the article! EEng 06:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@Eng: Any problems with double listing? I will off course delist once one or the other gets going? —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 18:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations! Your GA has been approved!

Don't leave both open; choose one or the other. Personally I'd just go for GA. But again, I think I listed something for GA a year ago and I'm still waiting. Of course, I'm not doing any GA reviews, so I guess I'm part of the problem. EEng 21:47, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Hahahaha, will do. And Hertz1888, sorry about all the pings and thank you for lending me your talk page. Exits stage left. —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 23:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Undoing a revision

Hi,

I see that you undid my revision: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Twilight&diff=prev&oldid=715873033

I guess it wasn't clear to me what the sentence means, perhaps clarification is needed?

"The dimmest stars ever visible to the naked eye become visible..." If they are ever visble, how can they then become visible? I guess it also doesn't make sense if they are never visible and they become visible.Jray310 (talk) 03:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

@Jray310: Greetings, James. I can understand your confusion. The sentence was open to misinterpretation. I've revised it here, aiming for lack of ambiguity. I hope you like the outcome. Please comment. Hertz1888 (talk) 17:54, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

(Hertz, pings don't work unless they're made in the same post in which your four tildes appears. Here, I'll do a free one for you now: @Jray310:. EEng 06:57, 16 February 2017 (UTC))

(Thanks for pinging me @EEng: --Jray310 (talk) 07:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC).

Thanks Hertz, that's better. My only suggestion on your revision is to change to approximately the sixth magnitude--Jray310 (talk) 07:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC). I have changed that now, see here: Special:Diff/765757637. --Jray310 (talk) 07:58, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. The teamwork is wonderful! Hertz1888 (talk) 04:18, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps we should notify the media! EEng 04:58, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Balfour Declaration

Hi Hertz, would you be interested in helping at Wikipedia:Peer review/Balfour Declaration/archive1? I have been working to bring it to FA status, and believe it is getting close. You have contributed greatly to the article over the last decade (you've made 180 edits to it, almost five times the amount of the next most frequent editor). So I was wondering if you'd like to join the effort, to ensure the article is as well written and balanced as possible.

Thanks, Oncenawhile (talk) 09:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Public Garden (Boston)

Thanks for your continued proofreading and copy editing of Public_Garden_(Boston)! I'm hoping to continue making improvements there, and your continued help would be greatly appreciated! -- Nemilar (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2017 (UTC)