User:Jwanders/Old talk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Refactoring Hubbert Peak

Good job refactoring the Hubbert Peak discussion page. I want this page to be a featured article eventually, and the refactoring made it more clear how to get there. Thanks. GuloGuloGulo 02:31, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for refactoring. The page seems to need work, but discussion not going anywhere. Your refactoring really helps. I only wish now that we could make the Energy Development or Sustainability project a working reality. Tom Haws 22:06, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Stopping power

Good, solid edit, thanks. Just needs a wee bit changed, which I'll be putting on the draft page shortly. Arrkhal 04:12, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) (I hate it when I forget stupid stuff, like signing posts)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Energy Related Development by Civilizations

Hi. I'd like to make this project a reality. To do so, I think we need to do the following:

Simpler name. Maybe Sustainability or Energy Development. I favor Sustainability.
Simpler page. The page scares people. We should just start with sections for Participants, Guests, Polls, and List of Categories and Articles.
Personal invites. We can invite several people to add the project page to their watchlists and follow discussions there.

Your thoughts? Tom Haws 22:16, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

hmmm... First off, I confess I've yet to actually read the Peak Oil article. Silly real life getting in the way of important wikiing! Anyway, I've been planning on sitting down and going through it sometime this week, and I'll be much better able to discuss how to move forward once I do.

Secondly, I've only been on the Wiki for a couple of months, and am not to sure what a project really is or what they're for. I imagine there's a whole page about it in the "how to" section that I could easily find in a few seconds of searching, and I'll add that to my list of things to do this week. I do agree that the three points you mention would be very important if we want to move the project foward.

Stay tuned. --Jwanders 23:07, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Just please add Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy development to your Watchlist and participate in any discussion and polls there. Thanks. It will be easy, I promise. We really need some additional input. We are kind of at a standstill on some issues. Tom Haws 05:48, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy development

Could I get you to chime in on the poll here? I appreciate it. It represents a sticky ongoing question. Tom Haws 06:43, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

...for updating the Maintenance COTW. -- Beland 02:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image request for solenoid

Hi, and thanks for taking an interest. I see that I completely failed to give a helpful explanation of what was required on either the image request on the page itself.

Yes, one solid torus lies completely inside the other, but not in the most obvious embedding: the smaller torus winds around p times inside the big one before joining up. (In particular, this is only possible because the smaller torus is long and thin and bendy: it's topologically a torus, but geometrically it's not the traditional shape.) To try to be more explicit, imagine you have a huge orange plastic walk-in torus occupying your living room (the outer torus) and a very long, thin, flexible inner tube (the inner torus). Climb inside the big torus through the secret hatch in the side, and shut the hatch after you so that it's a proper torus again. Now temporarily cut through the inner tube so you have a long rubber cylinder, and drop one end and weight it in place with a stone, keeping the other end in your hands. Walk p times around inside the big torus, then when you get back to the stone for the pth time, pick up the end and glue it back to the one you're holding so that the inner tube becomes a topological torus again. You now have the two toruses embedded one inside the other in the correct way.

The way I think about it is that in every circular cross-section through the big torus you see p smaller circles corresponding to sections through the little torus: for greatest geometrical symmetry, these p circles should be regularly spaced in a circular pattern, and then their position within this circular pattern must gradually rotate as you vary the cross-section so that each one joins up to the next one in one traversal around the cross-sections of the big torus. I believe it would be possible (though hard work) to derive an explicit formula for surfaces corresponding to the two toruses and then produce an illustration using standard 3-d graphing tools. But I wouldn't like to discourage a completely different approach.

I hope at least some of what I've written here is comprehensible. —Blotwell 02:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Cool, I like it. If I had one criticism it would be that the colouring distracts attention from the internal construction which is presumably the main point of the picture. (Also, the caption's wrong because this picture isn't the solenoid, it's just the first step in the construction out of infinitely many steps, just as the unit interval with the middle third missing is only the first step in the construction of the Cantor set. In the second step you take another torus and wind it p times around inside the inner torus, so it goes p² times around inside the outer torus, and so on. The solenoid is the set of points which are inside all infinitely many tori. I wouldn't say no to more diagrams illustrating this, but they would surely be more difficult and I didn't intend them in my original image request.)

Incidentally, don't hesitate to edit the article text if you can add a comprehensible description of any of this. —Blotwell 01:37, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Map

I think perhaps you should include classifications for legalization , legalization only for medical purposes, and prohibition. I have no idea where you could find sources for the information but they must be somewhere. If you do this I think this could go in the Legal issues of cannabis article. --Revolución (talk) 03:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hubbert peak

J, The argument that related postmortem works can be injected into an article bearing a proper name is long and fraught with compelling arguments to the contrary.

Allowing Hubbert's theories to be freely mixed with related theories begins the process of a straw man, moreover it makes every future discussion the subject of an unfair dichotemy.

for example: If Colin whoever, turns out to be a fraud, does that reflect on Hubbert. If Hubbert was wrong, does that reflect on Colin? So we argue that Hubbert guessed, he had a 1 in 15 chance of being accurate, and he, rather than the other 20 who guessed and are now forgotton, happened to be right - so what?

Now do we combine one guesser with a new guesser who is begging to be granted the defacto credibility of an earlier guesser by using his name? I suggest not. If the new guesser can do better than one right guess in a lifetime, then we can build a religion in his honor, but should we entertain this muddled pseudo-logic of granting heridity and lineage to future scientists? It's not a monarchy, it's not a prophethood; why should we imploy the metaphor of dynasties in the field of science. such reeks. Benjamin Gatti

[edit] Fix your sig

Your sig contains an unclosed 'small' or 'sup' tag. Please fix it. R adiant _>|< 22:35, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually this may be a false alarm, it seems Wikiformatting is acting up tonight. But since my sig does work, you may want to check it anyway. R adiant _>|< 22:46, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimedia Canada

Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there!--DarkEvil 17:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sustainability topics (& hope you're still around)

Looks like you haven't been editing (under this account) since mid-Nov 2005. I hope it's just an extended holiday - if so, then hope to see you around. I'm focusing on areas such as the articles in Category:Appropriate technology, then soon on the related areas of Category:Sustainability and Category:Development. Cheers, --Singkong2005 02:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WIkiProject Environment

Hello and welcome to WikiProject Environment! --Alex 08:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Feedback

Thanks again for your feedback, I really appreciate that. When I read SynergeticMaggot, I reckon the main issue here is the source of information. However, since I researched the information on Indonesian websites (excluding Dewa Budjana's website), you and zillions other people probably wouldn't understand that, which is a huge problem. So, basically I've put the sources, although those are on the external links part (I'll move it to source part). Do you have any suggestion on this? Thank you - Imoeng 11:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dewa Budjana's references

Could you check it? I've made the references (its pretty hard to learn though) Imoeng 12:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

"Yeah, that looks perfect. The citation/references bit is one of the hardest things to get use to around here; I only started to really make sense of it yesterday, and I've been editing off and on for years! The amount you've learnt and done in three days is truly impressive"

I take that as a compliment, thank you!

[edit] Headingthe

Thanks for the note- it looks like a lot of people are receiving that problem. I tried fixing it; can you try it again? AZ _t 20:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Time Enough at Last

Hey, thanks for the feedback; I responded on that page (it's kinda hard to follow the page as far as watchlisting it) with a game plan of sorts for my vision of the template-to-be. I'm not sure what TTW (The TWilight Zone?) stands for in the templates I mentioned, but I suppose the new one can use those initials for consistency. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to unify the seven templates. One template to ~~rule~~ replace them all, and in the twilight? bind them. Moulder 17:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again for the (surprisingly easy!) template solution - haven't had a chance to play around with it and apply it to the other ep pages yet, but I plan to soon. One thing perhaps a bit more complicated is that I was thinking we could make the episode list a drop-down section the way topic areas on WP:GA are. Any thoughts on that?

And since you're a scientist who's probably had a good deal of experience with citations and such, perhaps you could take a look at [peer review request] for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (I was actually split as to whether to request PR or RFF on that one). A weakness of WP is the lack of strict guidelines and reluctance to call anything a rule, leaving a lot of things in the grey area... Feel free to respond here this time since it's a new conversation. Moulder 17:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

So, I finally get home after a long day, dead tired, hardly even able to stand anymore, and want nothing more than to gently drift off to sleep. Of course, I think, "oh, maybe I should do some wikiing first!"

"No, NO!!," the other voice in my head replies (don't worry, there are only the regular two. I'm not crazy or anything) "you need to sleep!!".

"Yeah... I guess you're right... I'll just quickly check and see if I have any messages, yeah?"

And, of course, not only did I have a message, but the message posited a fun little coding puzzle that I of course couldn't just let lie there unsolved all night. Heh, check it out ;-)

But that's it (for tonight). I'm going to bed!! --jwanders^Talk 22:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{LinkedDate}}

Sure - I have done it before - I just have to find the template - and I don't have time right now to find it - my memory is that one needs to use HTML Characters in order to get it to work right when subst - and not wrongly insert extra stuff --Trödel 18:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FAR/C process

Hi J

Thanks for your message about the backlog on the talk page. The four or five regular reviewers/managers of this process are only just coping with the volume; we'd like to give more attention to all of the nominations, but it's hard. You may be aware that the process has been significantly modified, about six weeks ago, I think. It's proving to be very popular—IMV, this is because the PR process typically doesn't provide what people need, and because of rising/changing standards for FAs.

Whatever the reason, the input of experienced editors will probably have a significant impact on WP's culture, although not immediately. We'd be delighted if you dropped in occasionally (or often) to review articles and/or help with the management of the process.

Tony 02:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind commenting/voting at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Right whale. The FARC vote will decide whether it will remain an FA or not.

You could also volunteer to help one of the less fortunate FAR/C listed articles with a copy-edit or a section or two or by addressing one of the issues raised by the nominator (usually adding citations and lead paragraph improvements). --Maintain 04:13, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vertical axis wind generators' article deleted by Jwanders

On 21:11, 2 August 2006 Jwanders deleted my contrib to "Wind Power" page, regarding vertical axis wind generators (Kitegen Project). I'm not interested in editing wars, so I simply wish to know why. It was not possible to integrate my contrib inside the page article? The text I submitted is a translation (from italian to english) taken from the italian Wikipedia page "Energia Eolica" linked to "Wind Power" page. Magius

Hi! The anonymous 80.181.113.234 (talk • contribs) added this section to your talk page signing as Magius.^[1] You replied on the talk page of the Magius article, though.^[2] Maybe you should reply directly on the IPs talk page, or ask if he is indeed Magius (talk • contribs)? -- ReyBrujo 17:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese template

Thanks, this is for a proposed wikiproject about Chinese Romanization. Use Image:Zhongwen.svg if possible, otherwise, you don't need to include an image. For the text, you can do something like:

   * This article needs translation of pinyin to the corresponding chinese symbol(s).
   * This article uses Chinese Romanization, which should be translated into pinyin and the corresponding chinese symbol(s).
   * This article uses traditional characters, but should also include simplified characters.
   * This article uses simplified characters, but should also include traditional characters.
   * This article has faulty Chinese to English translations. 
   * This article has faulty English to Chinese translations.

Bibliomaniac15 19:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] COTW Project

You voted for Textile, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. Davodd 02:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sign your comment...

Go and sign your comment on mytalk page. And make it snappy! --Street Scholar 21:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't leave a "comment" on your talk page, I left a vandalism notice. I don't appreciate your tone and would thank you not to post here again. --jwanders^Talk 22:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yoshiaki Omura page

Thanks for the idea re Yoshiaki Omura page - I think I will take up your suggestion. My best regards.--Richardmalter 23:25, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article Critique

Firstly, thanks for all your hard work in moderating the Good Article nominations.

I note that you meant no personal attack against me, and kept that in mind while writing this. I see that the Great Salt Lake article has already been discussed, so I'll leave that to whatever-the-process-is between you and the other guys.

However, in good faith, I must raise my concerns about your demotion of the Phoenix Zoo. I feel that, considering the standards (examples given on article talk page) of other good articles, this was up to the mark. I have slightly improved the article in ways which you illustrated were degrading to its' quality, and also discussed a few, and I ask that you reconsider. Note that I had never edited, nor know anyone who ever edited, this article before these fixes, and my editing was merely some MOS fixups which you were kind enough to point out. Thanks again, Killfest2—Daniel.Bryant 09:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For moderating the levels of quality of the Good Articles when they're approved to maintain the high standards that GA's are associated with, I award you this Working Man's Barnstar. Killfest2—Daniel.Bryant 10:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Great Salt Lake improvements

On the one hand, I disagree with your decision to remove Great Salt Lake from the good articles list, but on the other hand, I am just glad that more people are pointing out ways to improve the article. For awhile now I have pretty much been the only one working on this article (that is not to say I wrote it all), so I need outsiders' perspectives into improvements that are necessary. Do you have any other issues with the article that could possibly be addressed? --Lethargy 22:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Clarification: I am glad that someone is judging articles more strictly for GA status, my only complaint was that these issues could have been fixed quickly to bring it up to those standards, and delisting it wasn't necessary in my mind. Again, thank you for your input and please post any more you have. --Lethargy 22:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow! Don't do that!

04:04, 6 August 2006 Jwanders (Talk | contribs) m (moved Battery to Battery (disambiguation): Moving primary topic, Battery (electricity) to Battery)

I don't know what else to say. I am just floored. And you marked the edits minor. I totally agree with Vegaswikian undoing these moves. I hate to be so negative, but … --Charles Gaudette 21:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi J, good to hear back from you. You can look at Wikipedia:Requested moves and Wikipedia:Disambiguation.

Did you look at this, What Links To: Battery?

In my New Oxford American Dictionary the word battery has one listing and 5 senses.

Also, take a look at the etymology:

"Middle English : from French batterie, from battre "to strike," from Latin battuere. The original sense was [metal articles wrought by hammering,] later [a number of pieces of artillery used together] ; on this was based a sense [a number of Leyden jars connected up so as to discharge simultaneously] (mid 18th cent.), from which sense 1 developed. The general meaning [a set or series of similar units] ( sense 3 ) dates from the late 19th cent."

It all boils down to the word battery not being as clear cut as you think it is, and that changing the Battery article will have non-trivial side-effects. --Charles Gaudette 23:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need Feedback

Hey Jwanders, how are you? Umm, so, I came up with a problem cause I've made Portal:Indonesia but I found there is no place to get feedback for portals (I've asked at WP:HD as well, but no one has replied it). So my only option is to ask people individually, hahahah. So, yeah, do you mind checking the portal? Cheers -- Imoeng 18:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] JPG -> SVG

Hi! I replaced your image [3] with an svg version [4]. If you have any suggest, I would greatly appreciate it, if not - could you mark the JPG version for deletion? Best, 4^@ 09:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You helped choose this week's WP:AID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week French Revolution and Lee Smith (baseball) were selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help.

Draicone ^(talk) 12:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Backlog at WP:FAR

Hi Janders! You asked a while ago how to help with the backlog at WP:FAR, and I don't think anyone ever answered you. There are several older FARs (at the bottom of the list) that have not had enough reviews for consensus. We need more people to review the articles, and vote Keep or Remove, in the cases that don't have a clear consensus (at least 3 votes one way or the other). Sure would appreciate the help ! Sandy 12:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Energy portal

Hi! As a contributor to WikiProject Energy development, I thought you might like to be aware of the opportunity to contribute to the new Energy Portal, now that there is one... No need to reply. Gralo 17:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/w/a/User%7EJwanders_Old_talk_f33c.html"