User talk:Awolf002/Archive1
Archive of dicussions (Jan 2004 - Jan 2006)
[edit]To post a new talk item go here!
Welcome
[edit]Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.
Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.
You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.
If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
- If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
- You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
- If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 19:26, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Talk here
[edit]Very nice work on the MER articles. Sennheiser! 12:46, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I just wanted you to know that we have the full text of the MER news breifings at this wikisource page. Sennheiser!
- I am a user of Wikinews and am Planning an exclusive with teh creater of the Stardust@home project and the SETI@home project. I am looking for more info and more questions to ask. here is a link of my current article. http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Exclusive:_David_Anderson_talks_about_the_Stardust%40home_project
My user name on Wikinews is DragonFire1024. Please feel free to help me out in any way you can. Also the talk page has some info as well. DragonFire1024 22:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
57P/du Toit-Neujmin-Delporte
[edit]I added a stub for this comet and linked to it at List of comets. It's noteworthy because it's now broken up into 19 fragments, some photos are available. You can de-stubbify it if you have the time and inclination. Curps 19:27, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Cool! I will check out, today. Awolf002 14:08, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
List of periodic comet numbers
[edit]See the new page List of periodic comet numbers for all numbered periodic comets. Curps 01:19, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Nice list!!! Awolf002 14:09, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
RST Article
[edit]Waiting for your continuing comments on the strawman I've been drafting. Doug 13:36, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Do you ever check this page? You asked for comments and an effort to rewrite the article and then you just ignore the response. I can see that you are plenty active elsewhere in the pedia so what's the deal? Doug 17:56, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
ndash instead of mdash for number or date ranges
[edit]Hi,
For a range of numbers or a range of dates, the usual typographical convention is to use an "ndash" instead of an "mdash" (it's a bit shorter). For instance, for "date of birth" – "date of death".
-- Curps 02:35, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Also, you should add a "[[Category:Astronomers|Surname, Firstname]]" tag to pages that you create for astronomers.
Great work, by the way.
-- Curps 02:49, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I wrote a small Perl script that extracts the obituary references from http://www.astro.uni-bonn.de/~pbrosche/persons/obit/index.html and converts them to NASA ADS links. I find it's easier to do that than to try to add the obits manually.
-- Curps 18:28, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I've recently added a lot of material on William Coblentz. A second set of eyes would be helpful for reading the article. - Astrochemist 03:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Charley radar image
[edit]Nice catch on that NEXRAD image of Hurricane Charley. I meant to grab one around that time, but forgot what I was doing and ended up getting one from an hour later when it was a bit less impressive. Did you download it "live" or is there somewhere to get them after the fact? -- Cyrius|✎ 03:48, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
MER-A
[edit]Angle in seconds. Thanks for spotting that. Bobblewik (talk) 23:32, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Maxwell-Boltzman distribution
[edit]- I always thought the M-B distribution function has as value the probability, not its density
This statement seems confused. Every probability distribution on the real line has a cumulative probability distribution function; some of them (the ones that are absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure) also have probability density functions. Obviously the cumulative probability distribution function has probabilities as its values, and obviously the probability density function does not. Since these graphs are of density functions, their values are not probabilities. But I need to ask you: the probability of what event? If you're talking about the cumulative probability distribution function, the event would be that of being less than or equal to the argument to the function. Is that what you had in mind? In a sense, the probability distribution does have probabilities as its values, but it cannot be graphed, since it assigns a probability to every Borel set of reals, so if you want a graph, you've got the density function and the c.d.f., and perhaps other things (specify which, if any, you meant). Michael Hardy 20:40, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Well ... Here's an opinion from a scientific researcher. There are different versions of the Maxwell-Boltzmann (MB) distribution, but they all have units of probability per "something". If you're working with the MB distribution for molecular speeds, for example, then the units of the MB distribution are probability per speed. To calculate an actual probability you have to multiply the function's value by an interval of speed. Okay, you really integrate the MB function over the range of interval, but for small intervals the MB distribution's value is essentially constant. In either case the speed units cancel and you get probability. For example, suppose that F(v) is the MB distribution of molecular speed and you want to know the probability of an oxygen molecule moving with a speed between 444 meter/sec and 445 meters / sec. Then the answer is that the probability is (interval) * F(v) = (445 - 444) * F(v). Math types will be quick to note that if the interval is 0 then so is the probability. In other words the probability is 0 that an oxygen molecule is moving at precisely 444.00000 ... meters / sec. - Astrochemist 23:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Tampa Wikimeet Cancelled
[edit]Hi. You had listed yourself as interested but unable to attend this weekend's meetup. I just wanted to let you know that I cancelled it for lack of participation; it would have only been User:TheCustomOfLife and me. But we should all get together on an informal mailing list or something to plan some activity for the future. Jimbo Wales 12:37, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wikiflorida/ [[User:Gamaliel|Gamaliel File:Watchmensmiley20.gif]] 22:20, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Surviving Hurricanes
[edit]im just asking what safety tips do we do to keep safe if theres a hurrican?
- It is generally a very good idea to follow the announcements of your county's safety offical. Especially, in case evacuation is suggested or mandated for your area. I myself do not live at the coast, so only people in mobile homes or manufactured homes were asked to find shelter somewhere else. Secondly, since torndaoes are a concern, make sure you go into the safest place in your house, where there are no windows and the least number of exterior walls. Most of the time an interior bathroom works well. Then, finally, prepare to be without power and water for some days after the storm. Right now, I'm without power for three days, and it might be another week before I can run the AC/fridge again. Have water and non-spoling food and all your medications for at least three days with you close to your safe place. Flashlights also are very handy. Awolf002 16:53, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
[edit]Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 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. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are 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 what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)
Could you go back and look at
and make sure that it is legal for Wikipedia and, if so, add the appropriate copyright tag? This is important. Likewise for any other images that you've uploaded without tagging. Thanks! Kbh3rd 00:50, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Sig errors
[edit]Thanks for spotting my stupid mistake with the sig in 2005 in science. I must be spending too much time on VfD, and it turned into an automatic habit... Average Earthman 10:34, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Rovers
[edit]Sorry; there were an awful lot of articles with the 'rover' name, and I didn't check all the Talk pages. The text of the articles at which I looked used the capital for the missions and for the named vehicle, and lower case for the generic term, so it seemed right to make the titles consistent with the text. As I'd only ever seen it capitalised (in newspapers, etc.), it didn't occur to me that there's be a problem. I'll post this on the Talk pages too. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:03, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Actually, I've just checked, and the first three Rover-related articles at which I looked have no mention of the capitalisation being an issue — in fact, everyone on the Talk pages uses the capitalised form throughout. Which article are you referring to? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:07, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Rover Photo
[edit]I dont know, I thought the page graphically was very weak with the box and tiny intro paragraph. And the release of the photo today is I thought was historic, at least very topical. It is today's current event news item, and I think that is what drove me to what to punch up the page since so many would click to it in September.
The photo actually is not the intro, the tiny intro paragraph is. It is normal for article summarys to be followed by a photo, what we both share as a problem here is a tiny opening summary.
I feel the picture grabs the first time readers attention at the top, retains their attention to read the content to follow. I would weaken on that after the September current event history recedes and so I suggest and ask you to revert your movement with these considerations. Basically, again, I believe without the long top photo the page is graphically very weak and that makes it less interesting. BTW I'm proud of you for monitoring the page.Kyle Andrew Brown 01:05, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
Belt of Venus photo
[edit]Hi!
Thanks alot for your identification! --Fir0002 02:00, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
Transclusion
[edit]Hi. Here's some boiler plate:
Keep up the good work! - brenneman(t)(c) 10:58, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, I keep that in mind. Thanks! Awolf002 13:08, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Your RFA
[edit]I added my two cents worth on your RFA. If the tide doesn't turn on this one, I'll gladly put you up again in another month or two and I have no doubt you'll get the tools. This process is a real weakness of Wikipedia. Good luck. -- DS1953 20:12, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for your support! Awolf002 20:54, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- Seems like things are looking up, thanks in no small part to DS1953's eloquence (and your reliability, of course). This is why we give it a week. From a fellow Ph.D. who sometimes feels out of place around here, good luck to you. Chick Bowen 23:01, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks to you also for your kind support (of a fellow Ph.D. :). I sure thank DS1953 for stating his oppinion so openly and clearly. Awolf002 03:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your thanks! Some people have rationales for opposing that are frankly silly, I think; glad to see it looks like it'll go your way, as you've done nice work around here. Cheers, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations!
[edit]I'm pleased to inform you that you are now an administrator. Please consider reading all the material on the administrators' reading list before testing out your new privileges. Though everything you do, excluding image deletions and page history merges, is reversible, you should nevertheless be very careful with your sysop capabilities. For instructions, please see the administrators' how-to guide. Good luck! — Dan | talk 23:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- Congratulations! This saves me the trouble of renominating you. Enjoy the new tools, and don't hurt yourself with them. -- DS1953 23:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
You're welcome, and congratulations on your well-deserved promotion. Oran e (t) (c) (e-mail) 03:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations. Your RFA was one of the more interesting that I've seen, due to the substantial turn around in the voting pattern after the first few days. I'm sure you'll make a great admin, whether you restrict yourself to page moves or branch out into new activities.-gadfium 03:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the thanks...
[edit]...but they are entirely unneccessary. Wikipedia needs more educated admins, and it gives me great comfort whenever someone of discernment is promoted. You will make this place a little saner, smoother, and more productive, I'm sure, and for that, I thank you! Best wishes, Xoloz 03:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- Congratulations. And fair warning--I may well be back to ask you for some admin-favors. :) Chick Bowen 03:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- Fair enough!! I'm here to help as much as I can. Awolf002 03:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Kamisese Mara and Britannica
[edit]Hi there! You wrote: "It would be great if you could document this instance of plagiarism through time stamps or so, and put a wikilink to that documentation into the Village pump. Thanks!! Awolf002 02:35, 17 December 2005 (UTC)"
I'll certainly do as you ask. If you'll give me till Monday, I'll go back to the library and photocopy the Britannica Yearbook article. I'll then put up the documentation at the Village Pump, and will probably put an article about it on Wikinews also. This double game that Britannica is playing is just too good to keep quiet about. The Britannica article looks uncannily close to the Wikipedia of a few months ago. Hmm, I wonder how many other Wikipedia articles they've plagiarized. Probably hundreds. David Cannon 10:35, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- I've got a copy now of the article, and I think I need to apologise for leaping to conclusions too quickly. I still think the beginning of the Britannica article bears a striking resemblance to the first paragraph Wikipedia article, but the exact wording, and the order, is sufficiently different so a charge of plagiarism cannot be proved. I still suspect that Wikipedia may have "inspired" their article, but I would no longer call it plagiarism. I think most likely they've used Wikipedia as a resource, in much the same way that most of us would use Britannica as a resource. That said, I would like them to say so - especially in view of their negative public comments about Wikipedia. Nevertheless, I take back my charge of plagiarism. I should not have been so hasty to put such a charge in such a noticeable location, and I promise to be more careful in future. David Cannon 05:17, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
aetherometry etc
[edit]Hi. My opinions on this are fairly clear I think; but I'm not trying to discuss that here. What I wanted to do was to say thanks for your clear and incisive discussion on the talk page; you've said clearly some things that I had in my mind, but in a more formless way. I hope it leads to a productive discussion. William M. Connolley 22:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC).
- I'm here to help... Thanks for the thanks! Awolf002 22:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Note to myself: Users who stopped contributing after deletion of this article.