User talk:Jason Quinn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:
If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~
Regarding my reversion of your adding the comma after 'e.g.' - To the best of my recollection, that's the way I was taught it should be, and the way that looks more natural to me. No big deal, however -- if style guides say with a comma is OK, I won't change them back.
Hi, any more info on IRAF?--Joules214 19:36, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to invite you to comment further on the discussion Talk:Health issues and the effects of cannabis. If you're concerned that the article has been hijacked by a POV, the only to change that would be to contribute. siafu 22:11, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] e.g.
Hmm, that took you a while - the edit you refer to is almost two years ago! Anyway, I believe I was wrong to revert you without good explanation there, but you are wrong on one count - nowhere does it say on Wikipedia that US style is the default. In fact, it says that in most cases where there is a US-UK national difference, both used styles are correct. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 22:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hello
Hi Jason, Seems like we share quite a few other things in common beyond juggling, I am a Physics PhD also and used to be pretty good at mathematics, before I stopped practicing and forgot it all ;-) --Colin E. 10:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] juggling record
What's your source for the 3-ball juggling record? It seems bogus to me. Jason Quinn 00:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry it took me so long to get back to you, you left your message on my user page instead of 'talk', and my user page is one page I pretty much never see I guess. What record are you talking about? Pedant 20:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- If you can tell me what the text was that you are referring to I can find my source, I think... I'm not sure even which page it's on. If it was not googlable it was probably from Guinness World Records (Millenium Edition)... these are the ones I have handy:
[edit] Yuri Scherbina: One ball juggling
35 pound 4.5 oz ball 100 times (Mount Elbrus elev. 13,800 ft) July 1995
[edit] Ahmad Tajuddin: Foot juggling
3 hours nonstop, one ball made of cane (sepak takraw ball) 10,000 times with right foot without dropping the ball September 1996
[edit] Anthony Gatto: Most flaming torches
Anthony Gatto, 7 torches International Jugglers Association Festival, Baltimore Maryland July 1989
[edit] Most objects juggled
Aug. 7 1998: 1508 people juggled a total of 4,524 objects... European Juggling Convention at Edinburgh Scotland Pedant 18:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Juggling Record exposed
this is the edit where the bogus record came from, apparently the only edit from that ip address (213.78.56.215)
For what it's worth 68.183.79.42 is my current ip address, and it will mostly hover around that.
I think it was one of those "Wikipedia is so unscholarly that I myself have added false information to their articles" newbie tests that writers like to use to disparage wikipedia. Personally I would highly doubt any significant bump to that record, even 30 hours, since it is so inconvenient to arrange for witnesses. I once 'devilstick' juggled from 5:30 pm until lunchtime the next day, through the dark night at a Rennaissance Faire, and although there were dozens of witnesses, there was no continuous witness. I don't even think its a record, but my point is, you have to arrange a witness or several, and then you actually have to break the record, so I don't see anyone (with witnesses) going much over 30 hours without it being very easy to fact-check.
Anyway, it wasn't my edit and I'm really really dubious of 79 hours of juggling, witness or no witness, I couldn't even watch television for that long. Pedant 19:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Talk pages
Wikipedia is not a soapbox. While you made your posting on the talk page, it is still potentially libelous, as the talk page should not disparage the article's subject. We also cannot say something is "fact" because most people think it. Calling someone a name violates WP:NPOV. Even if most people think it, it is still a point-of-view. Michael 01:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- To question WP:NPOV, you should do so on the policy's talk page. Michael 03:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] God's Eye
Have a look at God's eye and Namkha. It may need some more work. Thanx for creating the article...i thought u may be interested.
B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs) 11:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
