User talk:Tagishsimon

Archive

1

Requested deletion

Done. I modified your achive link (above) to point to the new page name. SWAdair | Talk 07:19, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Red-link recovery

Howdy and many thanks for your work on that list of mis-punctuated links. The list's pretty much completed now - I'll be generating a new version of it in due course, taking all the lessons learned from the last one into account. In the meantime, if you enjoyed working through the list (or at least found it a worthwhile distraction), you may want to have a look at the similar list of plural discrepancies which highlights red-links that might be red because they (or the article they are aiming for) are improperly pluralised. Again, thanks for your efforts - award yourself a wikimedal for janitorial services if you haven't already got one! - TB 11:25, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

Brazil nut

Hi Tagishsimon - three things here; first, one article or two; having two articles about the same subject it pointless, I certainly think they should be combined. Second, about the removed content; as far as I could tell, this was a verbatim copy of an 1887 article or very nearly so; a lot of it was very out-of-date (!) and some plain inaccurate (e.g. the "Portuguese" name cited is actually Spanish, nor does the tree remotely resemble a chestnut, etc, etc, etc), which is why I cut so much of it. But I'll go through it again in the next day or two and see if there's any more worth extracting and restoring (tho' it'll need a lot of work to update) (won't do it now as its long past bedtime!). Third, the layout; pic layout can always be a problem with people with different size monitors, unfortunately I can't know how it appears on monitors other than mine. Feel free to rejig the pics outside the taxobox into better positions, though of course that'll probably mean it'll look weird on my monitor . . . MPF 01:36, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi again - fair point on the conker page, but that's the exception that proves the rule; most examples are on the same page, e.g. apple, cherry, chestnut, lychee, etc. - MPF 01:50, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi again - I've been through the 1887 article again, and there isn't anything more that I feel I can verify to transfer across safely; the June time of harvest I'd like to have added, but I can't find any info as to whether that is the only time of harvest, or whether it is just a sample point of a much longer harvesting period which would leave citing June as partial, incomplete data which might confuse readers - MPF 01:48, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks; you've found a good article there (don't know how I missed it!), better scientific data than the one I'd put a link in to. - MPF 13:43, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Cheshire Cat

Honestly, now. You and I may be intelligent people who have read and loved the books, but how many people have only seen the Disney movie and ignored the books? In fact, how many people have only seen the movie and not even realized there were books? I only wish the Tenniel version was more well-known, but we have to stick with majority. (On a side note, I like American McGee's version best...it's pure malice.) PMC 02:36, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Switch it to the right then, but I thought it looked nice. (At least in 800x600) And I'd love to find a bigger picture but I can't...I'll keep looking though. PMC 02:37, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I liked it better my way, but doesn't everyone? It doesn't bother me though. Hmm...would you prefer a full-body picture of the American McGee version? I just found it, squirreled away in some obscure folder of mine. PMC 02:53, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

lol, I'll go with the full body. It's just nicer. And if it sucked...I'll trust your judgement. Edit: Oh, and the three images in date order works for me. PMC 03:00, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There we are. Much nicer, I think. PMC 03:07, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"You young people" - like you're so ancient! Definitely include the year though. And what if we could make Tenniel spin? Should we include that under alternate methods of producing energy or something? =P PMC 03:18, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Blogwar

I have heard the term used before, and the article contained content besides the spam link. Having said that, I would not be strongly opposed to deletion of this article after a VFD vote. Academic Challenger 04:26, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

London Millennium Bridge dampers

Hi Tagishsimon,

I've just been doing a little more research on the London Millennium Bridge. Although I like your image of the dampers under the bridge, are you sure they are the ones retrofitted to cure the lateral vibration. I only ask, because they look like they would control vertial vibrations, and I came across this paper by the company that made the shock absorbers. Page 7 and Page 8 detail the dampers that were fitted, which all look different from the one in your photo.

(Trouble is, if it isn't the right shock absorber, I don't really want to change anything - or at least not until someone manages to get a photo of one of the other dampers - because it is a good addition to the story. On the other hand I guess accuracy is important.) -- Solipsist 07:32, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Good find; I've amended the picture caption, just in case, and put a link to the paper on the external links and the discussion page. However the text of our article talks about "52 tuned mass dampers (inertial) to control vertical movement", and I suspect my image is one one (or more) of these. Given that accuracy is the most important thing, withdrawing the word "retrospective" probably sorts out the problem, but please hack away at the bridge page as you see fit. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Actually that's a good point. Page 7 of the Taylor paper lists the number of each type of damper fitted, which accounts for the 37 fluid-viscous dampers. The picture could then be one of the 52 tuned mass dampers, but I would have thought the primary vertical modes would have been damped from the outset.

In fact, a little more research finds this article with excellent before and after photos of your damper. That's pretty clear, so sorry for the false alarm. -- Solipsist 22:36, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Darby Digger

I have just amended the page and added a further two photos - hope this meets with approval

regards

Normangrove

Hobbit

First off, I have nothing against "Tolkienism". I myself am a Tolkien fan and I hold the author in very high esteem. He was a brilliant man. Undoubtedly a genius. But I also believe in giving credit where credit is due, and only where it is due.

Tolkien took hobbits (or little people, or elves, or leprechauns, or whatever you wish to call them) and breathed new life into them. He gave depth and dimension to a race previously only used as a plot device. He did the same for Orcs, for Ents, for Elves, and others. For that he deserves credit, nay, applause. But what he does not deserve credit for is the invention of the word "hobbit".

As far as Tolkien's hobbits being the best known: they are the most popularly known at this moment. I have no problem with an encyclopedia describing fads, as this is important from a sociological perspective. And that's all this is. "Tolkien-mania" fizzled out in the sixties and didn't resurface until Peter Jackson's films. What do you plan to do a year from now when this craze, like the more or less equally popular Jurassic Park craze of the early 90's, also subsides? Perhaps you're a diehard fan who doesn't think it ever will subside. I thought the same about Jurassic Park at one point. I'm sure there's many women out there who in their pre-teen years never thought "Titanic" would go away.

Constructing pages using an NPOV in the here and now saves us a lot more work a year from now. If you want to create more work for people down the road, go ahead an structure the pages based on the flavor of the month.

Now, that said: I apologize if I was not clear in my intent with the use of the phrase "Tolkien zealots". I myself am a Tolkien fan. I was not using the phrase as a derogatory term for Tolkien fans, as I would be insulting myself. I was talking about the people Tolkien would probably be including in his "deplorable cultus" if he were alive today -- the sorts that would credit him with the invention of the wheel if they could make it sound plausible. In other words, I was actually speaking of zealots. And with the utmost respect I'd say that I think you were being rather reactionary in your summation of my own viewpoint, although I admit I should have been more careful of my wording. --Corvun 16:40, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Darby Digger

Tagishsimon

Thanks for your help. I have put some copyright to the images hope I have done it sensibly.

How does the information submitted get to be published at http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Darby%20Steam-Digger ?

Normangrove

London meetup Dec 3rd

Hiya Do you live in London? If so then you might be interested in this this Wikipedia:Meetup/London Cheers Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 11:16, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Anon's suspicious edits

Hello. An anon recently vandalized Hadal's user page, claiming to be a returning repeat vandal. I decided to check that IP's history and saw that on 28 AUG 04 he changed Dartford railway station to read "North-West Kent" rather than "south-east London." Since you've edited related pages I'm hoping you might be able to verify that edit. Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 05:50, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Thank you. I am unfamiliar with that area and would have had to check multiple maps to be sure. Thank you for taking the time to look into it. SWAdair | Talk 07:54, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Morpeth rail crash

I agree that there would probably have been some speed warning signs approaching the Morpeth curve, but these are not as visible as a signal.

I agree that details re Morpeth accidents are for now vague, however the isolated sharp curve underpins all these accidents.

I should have made this article a stub ....

As we talk, the Queensland super duper tilt train has just derailed on an isolated sharp curve of 60km/h in a fast 160km/h section, so the Morpeth problem is rather fresh in the mind.

Syd1435 09:22, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

Just at this point of time I cannot put my finger on any sources for the crash(es) at Morpeth.

I just remembered that there is now a permanent AWS magnet approaching the sharp curve.

The TPWS might give a better warning than AWS, but then again it might not, since TPWS is a botched job, not a full ATP.

Syd1435 11:47, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

Firstly, I think that I am doing well to crosslink topics together. This is best done on the spot when you notice something. Morpeth has been now crosslinked a few times.

Secondly, maybe Morpeth has a plaque or memorial to the victims of the varios crashes (like Clapham Junction) - maybe you could get out of your train and have a look!!!!! :-)

Syd1435 11:53, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

Waifs and Strays: Marc Almond influenced?

Heya Tagishsimon...looking at your photos...and the heading intrigued me. Wouldn't be Marc Almond reference would it?

Pathetic, eh?

I'm not the one who blew a gasket about an error. You're the one who felt it necessary to insult me because I wasn't paying attention. I fully admit that it was a stupid mistake. But did that require all the ridicule and histronics? I have a hard time believing so. --Wolf530 01:46, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

This is incredible! You insult me on my talk page, leave an overly sarcastic remark on the edit to ensure that everyone would realize how silly of a mistake I made. THEN you make some half-baked remark about how I "can dish it out but can't take it" -- which doesn't make much sense anyway, since you started the whole business, and now you're telling /me/ I'm over sensitive? The least you could do is apologize for being such an ass about it! --Wolf530 01:50, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Two wrongs don't make a right, surely. But can you blame me? All that snark and sarcasm? And you still won't even bother to apologize! I'm quite surprised we don't have a Wiki entry on the size of your ego. Quite insane really. We want people to contribute and be a part of the community, but make an error and we crucify them. Thank you, again, for doing your part to clean up the Wiki. Wonderfully responsible, and so delicately polite. --Wolf530 01:59, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Rice writing is real, so you're putting your foot in your mouth on this one. I have no idea if "Riciometreapoline" is what you call a person who can do it, but it is done. They sell these kinds of trinkets on the sidewalk in big cities. Perhaps you should do your own research. Two minutes on Yahoo and I found this, this, this, this, and this. I'm sure if you try a little harder, you can find other sites. Again, this is an issue of you treating other people like dirt. If you would use a little more restraint in how you speak to people here, it would benefit everyone. --Wolf530 02:19, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

sigh* Whatever. You win. If you can't even admit that the way you treat people is downright obnoxious, then there's no point in even discussing this any further. Have fun chipping away at whatever community Wikipedia has left. I'm sure they'll thank you for it in the end. --Wolf530 02:28, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

I saw it. But you still miss the point. Why are you so intent on leaving nasty little remarks everywhere you see a problem? --Wolf530 02:30, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Okay. Whatever. Done with all this. --Wolf530 03:25, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Don't take a pop at me

I fixed the stupid bloody article so that it was NPOV and then some other prick keeps coming back and rewriting the thing like a puff piece for the organisation. NPOV notices are completely pointless - why not just right "This article is crap". Better to remove the offending material, and then if someone doesn't conform to our norms about NPOV, send em to the relevant branch of wiki-stasi to hang 'em high. I removed that notice after there had been one entry indicating a problem in about seven months. Pcb21| Pete 07:51, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Join RWNB!

Hello!

I see from your contributions that you are interested in Russian topics. Perhaps you would like to join the new Russian wikipedians' notice board? It is a discussion forum for wikipedians interested in all things Russian. Also, each week we pick an unfinished stub article to improve through collaboration.

Russian Collaboration of the Week

Every week, a lacking Russian topic is picked to be the Russian Collaboration of the Week. The current RCOTW is Vostochny.

Notice boards and Collaborations-Of-The-Week have become increasingly popular on wikipedia reciently, with Irish, British, US and many more. There is also a score board for competing collaborations! See FAC.

Isn't it about time we got articles on Russia up to standard?

Hope to see you on RWNB!

Seabhcán 12:26, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me to work on my English comprehension

I am respecting Jimbo's discouragement of further participation on the aforementioned thread, so this is a bit of a moot point.

To clarify, many people consider it to be just as poor form to cite Godwin's law as it is to make a ridiculous Hitler comparison. Please go back and re-read the first couple of paragraphs in the article on Godwin's law, which also points out that citing it is poor form.

Anyone who is not a complete newbie on the internet knows that Cheesedreams lost the argument by making his silly Hitler remark. In this regard, you did nothing to advance the discussion by citing Godwin's law.

And your insulting remark for me to work on my English comprehension only shows that perhaps you are getting a little too heated about this election and perhaps should take a step back. For my own part, I have taken a step back and have realized that there are better ways to spend my time.

Regards,

--DV 00:18, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Afddfassfsjk

I'm hoping you had some reason for redirecting Afddfassfsjk to Knight's Tour. I figured I'd ask you first before making it a redirect for deletion. --Ricky81682 04:03, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Ok, I see that this was part of a mess of vandalism. Again, since you seem to be on top of things, should we start making these redirects for deletion? There can't be anything good coming from keeping these pages around. --Ricky81682 23:09, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for "the the" help.

Thank you for fixing the actual "the the" error in the Prince of Space episode in List of MST3K episodes, and for not fixing the cited error in Attack of the the Eye Creatures. I commend these efforts — as long as they're not automated — and will continue to remove such typos whenever I find them as well. — Jeff Q 20:38, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

NPOV boo-boo

Hi! Thanks for catching my error. I remember NPOVing that article in question because of the gushing, breezy style it's written in. I also seem to remember thinking it was a copyvio. Anyway, I've explained my reasoning on the talk page. - Lucky 6.9 18:51, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

1. ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
2. ...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man 16:24, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Elaine Paige

FYI, it was a typo and NOT a spelling error!!!  :) TOM 18:07, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks...

Thanks for your concern to my picture help plea. I am new to Wiki and am just getting the hang of it. I ended up solving my own problem. Thanks again for your support

About your vandalism warnings...

Please be more careful with your vandalism warnings. 4.139.57.147 does not appear to actually be a vandal - see my note at WP:VIP. The message you left at User talk:60.25.119.200 was not appropriate. I know dealing with vandalism is tough, but please be more careful. We don't want to accidentally bite a newcomer. - RedWordSmith 02:32, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

I only see three edits in Special:Contributions/60.25.119.200 - regardless, it looks like a bot. And I can't tell from the Whois information if it's a dynamic IP or not. There's no guaranty with an anon's talk page that your message will actually be read by the right person. - RedWordSmith 02:49, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

GFDL by default

You're right, I like your text better. I removed my statement (that you had crossed out) and copyedited yours a touch. Thanks for catching that. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 20:41, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

The Humungous Image Tagging Project

• Answer to your question at User Talk:Tonners62. :o) Tonya 23:14, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

• Thanks for alerting me to the HITP, Tagishsimon. I am interested in such projects, but I'm too busy for image tagging at the moment. Tim Ivorson 00:37, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Thanks for the offer, Tagishsimon, but I still have much work to do on common mistakes (I am working on the French wikipedia as well) so I'll stick to that for now. But when I am fed up I promise I'll give your project a try! Also, I have mediocre Internet access and I disable most pictures, so I'd probably miss the only enjoyable part of that job :-) Regards, Sam Hocevar 01:11, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• I'm not very pleased with getting project advertisements = spam to my user page. But in the past I have added lacking tags, and asked the author about the correct tag, so I might continue it despite your message... -Hapsiainen 01:14, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

• Thanks for the heads-up on this - and I have no objection to such messages!!! - but sadly I must report that I am so much more interested in "the the" than the complexities of image rights.... "words are my friends" but copyright law makes my head hurt! - Nunh-huh 02:11, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• I'll have a look, the only thing is I'm Canadian and young and thus not particularly familiar with American copyright laws. But I'll give it a go when I've nothing else to do. [[User:Premeditated Chaos|PMC]] 02:49, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Old...honestly. Anyway, I'll try to take care of a few simple ones. When the Cat gets done, drop me a line, I'd love to see it. [[User:Premeditated Chaos|PMC]] 03:29, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi!

How dare you mollify moderate modify my comments? I do not modify your comments to pages! I am not a shoe sock puppet, I am a well-intentioned troll! I'm stone half the day, you know.

By the way, what's a sock puppet? Is that an American thing? Blue This 03:32, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)