User talk:Zashaw
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello there Zashaw, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. BTW, nice work in the biology section. Cheers! --maveric149
Hiya, Zashaw!
Actually, believe it or not, I'm not actively following you around madly italicizing<g>, but species' names for some reason really bug me - my analyst says it's harmless. As for the method of italicization, my understanding was that wiki-style-markup is to be preferred to html-style-markup in cases where there's a choice. Of course, that may have changed, since I am now used to using it :) - or I may have been completely wrong in my understanding. At this point, sadly or not, I think '' can never stop being italic, since it's everywhere here! -- Someone else 05:26 Mar 22, 2003 (UTC)
- I sit corrected. Thanks. Plus it's nice to know people follow me around :-) Zashaw 21:22 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)
- Following is so much easier when you sit still<G> -- Someone else 23:43 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)
Feh! Are not major works of sculpture italicized?<G>...actually, it may be so, but I wouldn't dream of it without consulting a style guide! Lipstick (Ascending) on a Caterpillar Tread was a most bizarre sculpture - controversial mostly because it was unabashedly phallic in a way alumnae tend to object to - so when I saw Claes crop up on recent changes I just HAD to add it... Sadly, I don't know where there's a copyright free photo of it. - Someone else 00:12, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Re: bioinformatics on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates#Nominations with unresolved objections, I have made some edits to the article in question which hopefully resolve some of your objections. Perhaps you may want to revisit this page. Cheers, --Lexor|Talk 03:30, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi Zashaw, I appreciate the way that you organize your "To Do" list. It turned out to be useful for me. Also, I agree with your proposed policy change, but we'll need to be careful about not overdoing links. AdamRetchless 04:33, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- In response to your question on my talk page; I don't specifically work with RNA, tho I may have studied it a bit in classes and may have reason to work with it at some point. I'm basically a geneticist with an interest in evolution and development. AdamRetchless 23:50, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Featured Article Candidate: PaX
Sorry, I struck your first objection myself due to a misreading of the rules :)
Anyway, check over your objections, and strike the rest if applicable. If not, post more indepth on what i should do.
Also, I can't smear things on PaX; but ExecShield and W^X came out after PaX, and are just immitating it. PaX is from late 2000, years before anything else even started up. I think ES is 1-2 years old, W^X is the same deal. PaX is approaching what, 4 years old? It's OLD. :)
The ASLR it supplies is much more effective than the LLOR that W^X supplies. I don't think ES even supplies any kind of random placement of anything in virtual memory space, but I could be wrong.
I compared ES and PaX once on the LKML, based on Redhat's ES documents. I concluded that PaX was way better; it's most accurate to say that PaX is truly more mature than the others. The developer doesn't even seem to give half a damn what everyone else is doing; he's just trying to make PaX fast and secure. This is *exacly* what he should be doing :)
--Bluefox Phoenix Lucid 23:56, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
EDIT:
Wrote a section on this, by popular request. Can you withdraw your objections?
--John Moser 22:04, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Non-coding RNA: please use page move, not cut-and-paste
Hi Zashaw, when you move an article (esp. with a long history like this one), please use move the page, rather than doing a cut-and-paste, otherwise the entire page history is lost. In situtations like this, where there already existed a REDIRECT, you need to ask a sysop (like me) to first delete the REDIRECT page (this is no loss because there was only three edits and all of them were creating/removing REDIRECTs). Also, as the page mover, it is your responsibility to fix all double redirects, and fix links to Main articles in other articles that reference this one (right now there are very few articles that actual reference the article directly, an indication of a major change). In short, please be a little careful before moving pages as it can have consequences which require fixing and should probably be done (for articles like this with a long history) after leaving a short message on the Talk page. I have done all of the above for now. Thanks. --Lexor|Talk 14:44, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Featured Article Candidate: Enigma machine
I and some others (including yourself) have refactored Enigma machine per your recommendations on WP:FAC. What do you think of it now? Thanks. Johnleemk | Talk 12:52, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Existence of God merger
I'm attempting to develop a consensus in favor of merging the Arguments against the existence of God and the Arguments for the existence of God articles. A beta version of the resulting article is available at Existence of God. To date, there seems to be consensus in favor of this merger on the "for" talk page, I'm now trying to get a consensus together on the "against" talk page. Please visit Talk:Arguments against the existence of God to weigh in. I'm copy-and-pasting this message to everybody who has contributed to that talk page. crazyeddie 05:49, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Failed Search Suggestion
Hi, I saw your suggestion for "failed search" statistics to be compiled. I think this is a great idea, and have just suggested the same thing here. It would be a much more transparent method for getting people to write new pages, instead of always having to rely on the "requested pages" section. --Tomhannen 22:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
