User talk:Jagged 85/Archive 5

Message

There is a brainstorming session at the talk: List of Indian inventions page and I would value your opinion as you are one of the main contributors to the page. Please take a look.

Happy New Year, JSR 0562 03:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Specifically there is someone who thinks that chintz is an 'Archeological first' but while I may not agree with his layout and archaeology schemes I do ask what a chariot is doing in the article (wasn't it invented in Mesopotamia?). Could you join in the broader discussion here? JSR 0562 05:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Alhazen

I read a BBC article on this guy and I'm pretty impressed by our coverage. Do you think it's ready for featured status? - Mgm|^(talk) 10:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• BBC Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7810846.stm Let me know when the discussion has been resolved. I need a more detailed look at the article, especially if the discussion results in changes, but I think it's close to perfect and I'd be happy to support it once nominated. I'd even nominate it myself if you guys are game for addressing concerns of commenters. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

British Indian

Thank you for your contribution to the British Indian article, I am surprised it has taken this long for a person with good knowledge to write history on the UK's largest ethnic group. Any more contributions to such sections as British Indian Culture (inc. Music, Food etc), contemporary issues, society etc would be greatly welcomed. Thanks Stevvvv4444 talk 19:01, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue V - January 2009

It's here at long last! The January 2009 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is ready, with exciting news about Darwin Day 2009. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse --ragesoss (talk) 03:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Some questions on History of logic

I'm curious about the history of logic article. I was checking it out and found it to be verly poorly written and muddled, with a lot of other problems. When I looked in the article's history I found that older versions made a lot more sense. So I'm kind of wondering, what happened and also if you supported the changes? Here [1] is an edit history comparison that illustrates my point, but maybe you have a completely different take? ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Agenda: Talk:Inventions in the modern Islamic world

User:Gun Powder Ma has been deleting vast amounts of data on claims of sources on the article Inventions in the modern Islamic world - something which you have worked on. He claims the sources you supply are false and is proposing deletion to the article. I strongly advise you to check out the sources. He is coming up with some really ridiculous suggestions as to why it should be deleted.

He has also made suggestions that you have a history of "original research". LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 21:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Your recent changes to Coin

Hi there,

This is just a quick note to let you know that I have challenged your recent changes to Coin asking for sources. I honestly believe that this section can be easily vandalized if sources are not in place. Let me know if you need help adding them.

Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 09:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:EGG

Please read up on it. Something like this: United States is not allowed. Tool2Die4 (talk) 22:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

January 2009

Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive or hard to read formatting, as you did in Slumdog Millionaire, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Tool2Die4 (talk) 22:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

See my response at Talk:Slumdog Millionaire#Regarding Tool2Die4's edits. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 23:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion

the articles you contributed to are up for deletion. Please participate in the debate. LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 18:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Sock puppet

Do you want to go ahead and confess that you are editing under your IP of 72.220.228.31, using it for sock-puppetry? Or do you want me to just go ahead and initiate an investigation through the RfCU page? Using an anonymous IP to knowingly violate MoS isn't taken lightly. Tool2Die4 (talk) 13:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

What made you come to that conclusion without even a shred of evidence? Your personal attacks against me are completely outrageous, not to mention absolutely ridiculous and nonsensical. Go ahead and initiate an investigation through the RfCU if you want to make a fool of yourself so badly. Kind regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 15:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Your work

Seeing as the articles that you worked on were deleted, I think I should confess to something. I saved the articles and have permanant links to them. So in case you ever want to restart them or use tidbits of info from them all you have to do is ask. Sorry your work on them was deleted owing to misunderstandings. Personally I think it was WP:OR for them to trying to change the article and claiming Islam was "not a part of the inventions". LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 11:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

First line of biographies

I happened to go through Irrfan Khan and Mira Nair, where you've edited the first line to include the list of awards they've received. I'm curious if this is a standard style, and where can I get the manual for it. Jay (talk) 12:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not standard style. No award mentions in the lead sentence. It violates MoS and NPOV. Tool2Die4 (talk) 12:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I see that the mention of awards has been removed from the two articles noted, and several other articles. But it is still there in several others: Mahesh Manjrekar - Ram Gopal Varma - Mehboob Khan - Anurag Kashyap (director) - Freida Pinto - Tareque Masud - Loveleen Tandan - Nandita Das - Salim-Javed - R. Madhavan - Prabhu Deva Sundaram - Deepa Mehta - Saurabh Shukla - Sukhwinder Singh - Hrithik Roshan - Fatih Akin - Roshan Seth - Sarah Gavron - Danny Boyle - Resul Pookutty - A. R. Rahman. Jay (talk) 07:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I took care of those. If you see any more like that, feel free to delete on site, or message me. Crap like that ruins the encyclopedic value of Wikipedia. Tool2Die4 (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Message from JSR

The education in India article, a top importance article under WP: India, has recently been rewritten by me. Though the rewrite is is no way complete I invite you to take a look and see, and if possible contribute. Sincerely, JSR 0562 18:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at A. R. Rahman. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. --195.64.23.130 (talk) 07:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I only made two reverts to the article in the last 24 hours, so what is the warning for? I've already discussed my position at Talk:A. R. Rahman, explaining why the Filmfare Awards need to be included in the article, as is the case in most featured articles about film personalities involved in the Hindi film industry. Unless an adequate explanation is given for why they shouldn't be included, then I don't see any reason why they should be removed from the article. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 08:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning. Stop reverting the A. R. Rahman article. Seek consensus with your opponent at the talk page. I think, he also has good reasons for his position. --195.64.23.130 (talk) 08:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I am trying to seek consensus with 91.130.91.92 (if only he/she would respond), but you're not exactly helping by taking sides and getting involved in the edit war yourself. You keep reverting to his/her version of the article without even discussing why at the talk page. Like I said in the edit summary, if you want to revert something, then discuss it first. I've already given an explanation for my actions, but you have still not provided any explanation for your own actions. Please try to involve yourself in the talk page discussion first before making reverts. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 08:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

My recent actions is only based on revert rule. I'm just a follower of your discussions. Please continue to discuss until you reach consensus. --195.64.23.130 (talk) 09:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Are you Bengali?

I see your profile as you speak Bengali.Are you Bengali? Can you write in Bengali? -Thanks. Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 11:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I am bengali also from calcutta and I am working here about Benagli film industry & bengali wiki. There are few man working in bengali wiki. If you can read and write bengali, I could invite there. but that not possible. i just see that you add Matir maina to Benagli films of 2002. If you wish you can contribute regarding Benagli film industry related article.-Thanks. Jayanta Nath ^{(Talk|Contrb)} 12:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

history of education in India

I was planing a rewrite of history of education in India since late February but could not get to it earlier due to time constraints. I have rewritten it recently. Don't forget to take a look and thanks in advance for your time :) JSR 0562 19:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Filmfare

Hey Jagged!

I'm completely shocked at the way people are pushing their hard POV on AR Rehman. I'm not going to take it at face value or take these people too seriously. I've posted a message on the discussion page. I suspect of sock puppeting from this anon. Your sources on the talk page are great, though I don't think we have to prove something that is so obvious. Shahid • ^Talk2me 22:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Barny!

		The Original Barnstar
		Jagged 85 you are an asset to Wikipedia. Thanks for your contributions, especially those related to India. Cheers! Happy editing! --KnowledgeHegemony talk 11:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Welcome

Welcome!

Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.

• The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for February has been published. March's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
• Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
• Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Cinema of India

I have just managed to put together a rewrite of the cinema of India article. You're invited to take a look :) JSR 0562 10:43, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2009 Newsletter

The March 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

What's going on in India?

We have a lengthy dispute here whether Alexander the Great did really enter India and did really win against Porus (Battle of the Hydaspes River. Unfortunately, we aren't that familiar with Indian historians and their opinions. Can you help us establish whether there are any relevant scientific opinions doubting this or whether it's about some nationalistic rambles? Feel free to invite other editors who might be able to help. Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 06:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

about Hydaspes

I have reverted your edits in Hydaspes because I saw you referred to this "Guha" person. I would like more info on him, since I only found some text he supposedly wrote, which some refer to, which is completely lacking references and looks like a simple forum entry rather than a treatise. Apart from his obvious mistakes (see discussion) he did not sign this text as a historian of some sorts, which is rather peculiar and "promised" to come back with more info in the matter... Do you have any more information on who this guy is? If he is a historian how can he have misunderstood the words of Diodorus so much? Is he someone of a historical prestige in India? I am sorry if I have reverted things that do not have to do with him. GK1973 (talk) 22:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2009 Newsletter

The April 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Parallel cinema

Your additions on parallel cinema are good, but most of them are not relevant in this particular article. It's like a tribute to Ray. Just look at the section, all of it, but all of it, is about Ray and people being influenced by him. This is by no means a discussion of parallel cinema.

I think there is some mispresentation of what prallel cinema really means. Because there is of course art cinema, which included Ray, Ghatak and Sen, but prallel cinema is another very different thing. It existed within Hindi commercial cinema as well. Some of the works of Hrishikesh Mukherjee, T. Rama Rao were also considered parallel cinema, and it's all missing here. Gulzar once said about Mukherjee that "He started the trend of parallel cinema much before it actually started."

Having said, I still can't thank you enough for spending so much of your time on all these articles. I'm impressed but I would definitely want to discuss it with you on the talk page. Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

This new addition of yours is great. That's something I wanted to add. Many of RGV's films are also considered films of parallel cinema because of their realistic content and dialogues. This is a good paragraph. Satya was one of the clearest art films. Shahid • ^Talk2me 17:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Pyaasa and Taare Zameen Par are two great films but neither is an art film of parallel cinema. Recent examples of art films include films like Pinjar, Maine Gandhi Ko Nahin Mara, Dev, 15 Park Avenue, My Brother… Nikhil, A Wednesday, Page 3, The Last Lear etc...

It was important to me to note that parallel cinema is not necessarily those very serious films. Hrishikesh Mukherjee, T. Rama Rao and Shashi Kapoor's productions were also considered parallel cinema at the time. Today prallel cinema is also known as multiplex cinema.

As for the list of filmmakers influenced by Ray, it is not at all related to parallel cinema or its influences. It's got to do a lot with Ray himself but not the PC article.Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Well...

Jagged, you always pop up on my watchlist with your edits on different Indian-cinema articles. Not always do I agree with all of your edits,:) but I can't deny that I'm enormously impressed with your dedication and brilliant work. So here you get:

		The Indian Cinema Barnstar
		Jagged is hereby awarded for his complete dedication and amazingly brilliant work on Indian cinema related articles, and for his sincere and civil manner. You are undoubtedly an asset to our evolving project. Yours, Shahid • Talk2me 20:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Bollywood

Hi. Nice images but unfortunately they are copyrighted and are not permitted for use in articles in this way. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 19:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2009 Newsletter

The May 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Timeline of Islamic science and engineering

Some user has completely deleted vast quanitites of date on that article viting "bad sources". I'm sure that he couldn't have read all of them in one day. 78.148.198.170 (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't just "bad sources", it was completely incoherent, misplaced sections that were far too detailed and irrelevant for a "Timeline". I largely removed items that weren't datable events but simply "people" or "trends". The features Timeline articles (such as Timeline of chemistry) don't feature any such nonsense "range of dates". The amount of these ranting "events" (that are longer than even stub articles on the topics) was preposterious. The article was unreadable, unmanageable. I'd rather like to come to an agreement to try to limit the timeline to only "events" and manageable, 1 or 2 line summaries. I will try to redo some of my edits one-by-one with explanations of why they were removed. I also take offense, I read EVERY source and entry that I removed. Some were removed due to my mismanaging of my own file during my several hour editing process....--kittyKAY4 (talk) 23:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The reasons for REMOVING that content were stated on the edit and Talk pages. There is so MUCH repetitive information that you've repasted in. The blocks of text are too much. I'd like to request that you REMOVE these REPETITIVE, CONTRADICTORY, and UNREADABLE edits from the article. --kittyKAY4 (talk) 00:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Bollywood

Jaaged, though I'm enormously impressed by and proud of you for your extraordinary work on Bollywood, I have one concern: There are entire sentences and paragraphs which are identical and used in two different section. One example is sentences in both "Influence" and "Plagiarism". What do you suggest to do? Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Islamic science & engineering

Please bear in mind that Timeline of science and engineering in the Islamic world is about what the title says. It doesn't mean anyone, anywhere, who has a personal link to Islam (or not - I don't see any sources saying Kerimov was even a Muslim). Just about everything since 1945 should probably go. Orpheus (talk) 02:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films June 2009 Newsletter

The June 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Tollywood

Hey Jagged!

I see your new addition on the Bollywood article. You say "Tollywood in turn went on to inspire the name Bollywood, as the Mumbai-based film industry overtook the one in Tollygunge as the center of the Indian film industry." - this is the only noteworthy sentence of the entire paragraph, but it seems to be quite OR unless it's directly supported in the book. Could you please include a quote that says that Bollywood is actually inspired by Tollywood and not Hollywood?

The entirety of sources say Bollywood is inspired by Hollywood, and not Tollywood, and this is contradicted by what you have added. It may have been inspired by the Tollywood's naming process and not the name itself, which is not the same. Other than that, all the other info in the section about Tollywood being the first Hollywood-inspired name is not relevant in the Bollywood article.

Shahid • ^Talk2me 14:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Great work Jagged (as always)!! Shahid • ^Talk2me 10:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2009 Newsletter

The July 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Lists of characters for Gundam ZZ and Victory Gundam

Hello. I saw that you were the one who started the List of Turn A Gundam characters and I was wondering if you might be able to help us with the List of Mobile Suit Gundam ZZ characters and List of Mobile Suit Victory Gundam characters. Shaneymike (talk) 23:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Rock Paper Scissors

You may wish to look into Rock paper scissors, which sometimes believed to be a Japanese invention. Cheers, ~ AMorozov ^〈talk〉 10:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter

The August 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:55, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies ^talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies ^talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting

The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Please update your status with WP:VG

Dear WikiProject Video games member,

You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or {{User WPVG}} somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in recent months.

The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.

All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:

• Editing video game-related pages in the Article namespace
• Participating in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD, WP:GAN, etc.)

Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.

—WikiProject Video games (delivery by xenobot 03:30, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

um

This was a previously protected page that is currently under discussion and has consensus on restoring it back to its original form. There is no consensus to change the redirect. Please keep aware of history before making such changes. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

On unsupported claims and the policy of no original research

Hello, Jagged. I would like to point out to you that Wikipedia has a policy of no original research, which means that it is not possible to make claims in an article unless they are supported by the sources. Just now for example you made an edit [2] to Cataract surgery which stated that the cataract extraction procedure of Ammar ibn Ali "did not involve oral suction or an incision in the eye". There is nothing in the cited sources to justify this claim. In fact, it is in direct contradiction to the Savage-Smith paper (doi:10.1093/shm/13.2.307, pp. 318-319), which states that the procedure requires a "rather large incision in the eye, a hollow needle, and an assistant with an extraordinary lung capacity". So, I would like to remind you that original research is forbidden by Wikipedia policy and may be removed at any time, and that the encyclopedia will benefit if you take greater care in the future. Spacepotato (talk) 22:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Savage-Smith paper stated that in reference to Al-Razi's description, not Ammar ibn Ali's description. It doesn't look like there is anything to suggest that this was the case for Ammar ibn Ali's procedure. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 22:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The statement clearly applies to ibn Ali's technique. Spacepotato (talk) 23:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

UK census ethnic groups template

Hi. Just to let you know that I reverted your addition of a couple of links to Template:UK census ethnic groups. Firstly, Mixed White and Asian is not the same as Anglo-Indian. Sure, Anglo-Indians come under the Mixed White and Asian category, but so does other people. The two are not the same. Secondly, African migration to the United Kingdom is a redirect to Foreign-born population of the United Kingdom, not an article. Hope that makes sense. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, if you read my comment about the rationale for setting up the template at Template talk:UK census ethnic groups, you'll see that the aim was to avoid conflating birthplace and ethnicity (which rules out a link to African migration to the United Kingdom). Cordless Larry (talk) 10:36, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Earliest evidence for crank and connecting rod

I removed the inclusion of the alleged ancient Egyptian crank and connecting rod mechanism because it rests on erroneous interpretation of the cited reference and a lack of true understanding of the mechanism. In the context in which the crank and connecting rod mechanism appears, Robert Moores (p.146) does not speak of the ancient Egyptian saw, but of its "modern configuration as a slab-making machine". The entire absence of a crank and connecting rod mechanism in the ancient machine is corrobated by fig. 11 which shows the "operation of the 4th Dynasty drag saw". I think many people would appreciate that you really make sure that you have understood technological things before you plaster half Wiki with these kind of 'findings'. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't have access to Moores' entire text, so I just left it as "may have" in the article. From what I have read, it appears it was in reference to the ancient Egyptian device. Could you maybe quote the whole thing to make it clearer? Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 02:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

This type of saw, called a drag or frame saw, has been used to cut soft and hard stones for centuries, and is reported to date to at least 300 b.c. In its modern configuration as a slab -making machine, multiple blades are clamped in a frame and adjusted apart to the desired thickness of the finished slab. The frame hangs from four bars that connect its corners to an elevating (feed) mechanism above. According to Bowles, "as the frame moves back and forth, actuated by a crank and connecting rod (pittman), the cutting blades lift toward the end of each stroke. This permits sand to wash under them, and as they start back on the return stroke the blade bears on the sand which abrades the stone rapidly."

Please note that the supposed Ganchy reference (p. 47) in Crankshaft does not support what you claim it says. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 02:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The Ganchy reference does support what's written, but it's actually on page 41. I've just updated the reference in the article to the correct page. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 03:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter

The September 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

List of largest empires

Note that the Yuan dynasty/Khanate and the mongol empire are 2 different things, so it does make sense to list them separately. The Yuan empire is not just a part of the mongol empire but a separate entity, that originated/arose out of the separating mongol empire. Only under Kubilai Khan, you can see consider them as one entity (though his actual rule over the whole momgol empire as "great khan" was more of token rule), but with his death they are definitely separate, making yuan a successor state (along with the other Khanate north and west of it). I didn't revert that yet, but other editors might. Regards--Kmhkmh (talk) 03:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: I agree however with most of your other criticism. Although some IPs have made a lot of valuable contributions to the article, they've also (at least in parts) shown a tendency of tweaking and misquoting sources or using non-reputable/unreliable sources to justify their personal predetermined ranking. So the article definitely needs watchful eyes.--Kmhkmh (talk) 03:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Linking

I undid part of the links you added to Muslim Agricultural Revolution. Please be aware that you are known for linking too much. Please study wp:linking carefully. Do not link things more than 1 time in any given article. Debresser (talk) 02:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

You are right in this case. Sorry for the mistake. The general warning to be carefull about overlinking (for which this article had previously been tagged) stays . Debresser (talk) 03:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I see you continue adding links that I have removed previously and that are not necessary for this article. I have warned you... So here you are!

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In one of your recent edits, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you.

In view of your continued overlinking, I have posted on WP:ANI for help. Debresser (talk) 04:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I have added a reply, and some specific examples, there. Thank you for your understanding and participation in the discussion. Debresser (talk) 06:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy and adherence to sources

Hello again, Jagged. I have noticed that in many edits, where the source claims that X did Y at time Z, you have added the claim that this was a discovery, an invention, or for the first time, although this does not appear in the source. In many cases, this has resulted in factually incorrect material appearing in Wikipedia. A recent example of the problem is this pair of edits (#1, #2). In the first you claim, among other things, that the astronomical clock described by Taqi al-Din in his treatise The Brightest Stars for the Construction of Mechanical Clocks was the first user-settable mechanical alarm clock. This claim is not found in the source [3], so you had no way of knowing if it was true or not. In fact, as I believe you know, it is false since such clocks existed earlier in 15th-century Europe. In edit #2, after the first claim was refuted, you weakened the claim, but it still does not appear in the source.

Simply put, this is making stuff up, and making stuff up is not allowable. It is a violation of our policies of verifiability and no original research. If sources do not contain a claim, it cannot be entered into Wikipedia. If you follow policy and adhere to this principle in the future, the encyclopedia will benefit. Spacepotato (talk) 22:42, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Knight

Thank you for your contributions, such as your recent contributions to Knight. The two references you added in this edit, however, are not valid references to satisfy Wikipedia's verifiability requirements. One refers to a page that excedes the source's pagination, and the other is a link to a PDF that cannot be found. This may be the result of a simple error, such as a typo in the URL, but it needs to be corrected to be verifiable. Please find alternate sources or self-revert, as the material added fails our core requirements for inclusion unless it can be verifiably attributed to a reliable source. I hope you will continue to make valuable contributions to this and other articles, and I look forward to seeing your sources. Thank you. Wilhelm Meis (Quatsch!) 06:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I see you have corrected one of these. Thank you! Also, for your convenience Template:Cite web is a lovely little template for autoformatting your references (see also Cite book and Cite news), not to say that you must use it, but I find it handy and I usually use some variant for my own citations. If a link goes dead, the use of these templates will at least leave clues to help future editors track down sources and possibly find viable links. Wilhelm Meis (Quatsch!) 07:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to History of scientific method, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. changing the meaning of the cited sources is WP:OR J8079s (talk) 00:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Since you seem to think it's "original research", I've just quoted exactly what the cited source said. O'Leary did not say he "introduced the scientific method" like you were claiming, but only said he "introduced what may be called the scientific method." In other words, I think the one engaging in original research in this case would be you, not me. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 00:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Dont stop now

Good start here is another from flywheel :

The flywheel is first employed in a water wheel machine in the 11th century, as described in the Kitab al-Filaha of the Andalusian Arabic engineer Ibn Bassal (fl. 1038-1075), who applies the device in a saqiya (chain pump) and noria.

• Hassan does not call this device a "flywheel"
• Hassan does not call Ibn Bassal an "engineer"
• Hassan does not say this device is applied to a "water wheel"
• Hassan does say "noria" is Spainish for "saqiya"
• The web site is self published

Thank you for your prompt attentionJ8079s (talk) 02:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:BADCHARTS

Please do not add the United World Chart, or any other chart listed at WP:BADCHARTS, to any Wikipedia articles. The "World Singles Chart" on acharts.us is a mirror of the United World Chart. Thank you.—Kww(talk) 16:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Once again, please do not add charts listed on WP:BADCHARTS, such as iTunes, to any Wikipedia articles. Thank you.—Kww(talk) 01:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS October Newsletter

The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

battle of yarmouk

hi, Battle of Yarmouk is currently undergoing A class nomination, and need a copy-edit for style and stuff, check it if u can help. regards الله أكبرMohammad Adil 10:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

component charts

Please do not add component charts, such as Hot 100 Airplay or Hot Digital Songs, to any song that has charted on the the Hot 100. WP:Record charts indicates that component charts should not be included if the main chart has been entered.—Kww(talk) 04:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Guyver page

please do not re-add something that was removed. if you still think it is valid, the normal etiquette is to go to the discussion page to advocate your desired edit. in regards to the guyver being a mecha, please review the definition of mecha. a mecha is a piloted walking vehicle. the guyver has never piloted a walking vehicle and nobody in the series of guyver ever pilots a walking vehicle. if you still have any reason to believe that guyver is a mecha or that mecha is in any way relevant, please make a section on the talk page so we can allow all editors to give their opinion. Drag-5 (talk) 05:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)