User:Ancheta Wis/Accolades

Talk:Religious Pluralism
Thank you, Ancheta, for formatting my contribution to the talk page. I don't know whether we'll be able to integrate your proposal about diversity into the new Religious Pluralism article; it might go into a the section about explanations for Religious Diversity, something like that; perhaps you can make a proposal.--Robin.rueth 08:25, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Spread the meme! Quinobi updated WikiProject_Wikiportals and the Community hash 4 July 2005 02:53 (UTC)
 * let's hash it out

Cats!
Thanks for all your work on categories. We don't have anything like a consensus about what is fundamental, or where we should be going with highest-level categories or levels of granularity in each category... but I hope we will soon. Is there a main Categories Wikiproject?

In any case, we shouldn't let our debates about categorization spill out onto the Main Page. I am confused about why the people who have been active in editing the category-list haven't chimed in with their thoughts on the new main-page template. +sj + 22:33, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hello, AW. You said: Good idea - copy or move my contribution and put yours in too (telling BodNotBod!) Maybe new heading such as "Refining number and wording of the "fundamental" categories"? Robin Patterson 03:21, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you for responding to my appeal on the Fundamental category. What if we transfer the thread of conversation to Category talk:Fundamental. I will alert the folks on the Main Page that we will pick up the conversation there. Ancheta Wis 01:42, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * AW, I've no idea whether this is a reasonable location for this note, so move it if it's not. Gald to see a coment from you re Purr. I'd lost track of you after I gave up on Scientific method. You've clearly more patience than I with what had been going on there for a long time before you began to contribute to it. I've gone back and taken a look at it, and I hadn't expected it to grow in the direction it has. Too bad the tone that's evolved is so 'philosophical' and unapproachable by the Average Reader. Good to hear from you, even if indirectly. ww 02:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Many Thanks
Greetings, Ancheta! I've not been around for the past month or so and I only yesterday saw your best wishes on my Bob McEwen article being posted on the front page. I'm grateful for your support. And thanks very much for the praise on the narrative style. If I can help with your articles, do let me know. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 16:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi, I would like to express my gratitude for your participation at my recent RfA. The final vote was 68/21/3 and resulted in me becoming an admin!

For those of you who supported my RfA, I highly appreciate your kind words and your trust in me. For those who opposed - many of you expressed valid concerns regarding my activity here; I will make an effort in addressing them as time goes on while at the same time using my admin tools appropriately. So, salamat, gracias, merci, ありがとう, спасибо, धन्यवाद, 多謝, agyamanak unay, شكرًا, cảm ơn, 감사합니다, mahalo, ขอบคุณครับ, go raibh maith agat, dziękuję, ευχαριστώ, Danke, תודה, mulţumesc, გმადლობთ, etc.! If you need any help, feel free to contact me. PS: I took the company car (pictured left) out for a spin, and well... it's not quite how I pictured it. --Chris S. 23:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on Scientific Revolution
I think 212.135.1.57 is due for a block for his recent (and repeated) vandalism.

Thanks --SteveMcCluskey 16:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked per your request. I will monitor the page and re-block if he persists. --Ancheta Wis 23:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Max Born
Ancheta, Please can you weigh-in your opinion on the Max Born talk page. Best regards, bunix 15:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing on Scientific Revolution
Ancheta -- Regretfully, I've initiated the Disruptive Editing process to try to bring Logicus's actions to a halt so we can get on with writing an encyclopedia. If you can, would you look at the guidelines and procedures, and at the discussion on Talk:Scientific Revolution to help bring this to a speedy closure. Thanks --SteveMcCluskey 19:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I would be most grateful for a reply with some possible Wikipedian guidance to my response to your apparently helpfully intended comments of 12 September on the Scientific Revolution Talk disputes. Having failed to hang me with NOR policy, McCluskey is now trying it with Disruptive Editing policy. Note that he has misrepresented my comments to you about Bernard Cohen to Ragesoss as “He expressed his frustration that he was unable to convince I. B. Cohen of his errors”, whereas I expressed no such thing, and indeed Cohen's 1999 view supports mine rather than McCluskey's and Westfall's. [Re McCluskey's message above to you 'Wikiband masonry of three against Logicus' as McCluskey apparently sees it, please see my Talk comments to Ragesoss on why the Disruptive Editing claim is untenable re my 4 proposed edits.] Logicus 01:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Dobbs and Jacobs quotation
Ancheta,

Could I trouble you for the full text of that marvelous quotation you just posted from Dobbs and Jacob, Culture of Newtonianism. It expresses a point I want to make in a book review I'm writing better than I could, so I'd like to quote it. Thanks, SteveMcCluskey 03:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed quotations. Since Dobbs and Jacob were quoting Dobbs Janus Face of Genius, I know what I'll be getting from the library. --SteveMcCluskey 13:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on Scientific Revolution
I think 212.135.1.57 is due for a block for his recent (and repeated) vandalism.

Thanks --SteveMcCluskey 16:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked per your request. I will monitor the page and re-block if he persists. --Ancheta Wis 23:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Max Born
Ancheta, Please can you weigh-in your opinion on the Max Born talk page. Best regards, bunix 15:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing on Scientific Revolution
Ancheta -- Regretfully, I've initiated the Disruptive Editing process to try to bring Logicus's actions to a halt so we can get on with writing an encyclopedia. If you can, would you look at the guidelines and procedures, and at the discussion on Talk:Scientific Revolution to help bring this to a speedy closure. Thanks --SteveMcCluskey 19:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I would be most grateful for a reply with some possible Wikipedian guidance to my response to your apparently helpfully intended comments of 12 September on the Scientific Revolution Talk disputes. Having failed to hang me with NOR policy, McCluskey is now trying it with Disruptive Editing policy. Note that he has misrepresented my comments to you about Bernard Cohen to Ragesoss as “He expressed his frustration that he was unable to convince I. B. Cohen of his errors”, whereas I expressed no such thing, and indeed Cohen's 1999 view supports mine rather than McCluskey's and Westfall's. [Re McCluskey's message above to you 'Wikiband masonry of three against Logicus' as McCluskey apparently sees it, please see my Talk comments to Ragesoss on why the Disruptive Editing claim is untenable re my 4 proposed edits.] Logicus 01:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Dobbs and Jacobs quotation
Ancheta,

Could I trouble you for the full text of that marvelous quotation you just posted from Dobbs and Jacob, Culture of Newtonianism. It expresses a point I want to make in a book review I'm writing better than I could, so I'd like to quote it. Thanks, SteveMcCluskey 03:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed quotations. Since Dobbs and Jacob were quoting Dobbs Janus Face of Genius, I know what I'll be getting from the library. --SteveMcCluskey 13:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! From Anthony cfc - hope you enjoy the Christmas holidays and have a relaxing break! Tis the season to be jolly! - cheers and regards, Anthon  y  cfc  ( talk  •  email ) 19:52, Friday December 22 2006 (UTC)

Equality of base pairs in DNA
I will post a comment in the Scientific Method talk pages in due course, but a quick question first. You attribute the equality of base pairs to Oswald Avery. I thought it was Erwin Chargaff. Did they both discover it? Rjm at sleepers (talk) 13:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

History of computing hardware
History of computing hardware has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue IV - May 2008
A new May 2008 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is hot off the virtual presses. 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) 23:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you please help
Hello!

Since I noticed that you are an administrator, I was wondering if you could possibly help. Somebody has moved the article 165 to 165 (year), not knowing about the Wikipedia policy with year articles. Could you please help move it back. If you can't, could you please direct me to somebody who could? Thanks in advance /Ludde23 Talk Contrib 10:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Ariel Rios Building
You created it, and I just added a bunch of stuff. Still more to be done... Notice those tantalizing red links, for example. --JohnPomeranz (talk) 17:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Top Importance Chicago Articles
If you want to help me choose Category:Top-importance Chicago articles, come comment at WikiProject_Chicago/Assessment by June 5th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

List of guidebooks about the Sierra Nevada listed at AFD
If you wish, please contribute to the discussion at Articles for deletion/List of guidebooks about the Sierra Nevada. Thanks! hike395 (talk) 04:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

81K limit?
I know of no such 'limit' - there are FAs which are longer than 100K. But the fact to remember is that the 'readable prose' is much much less than 81K, which is what actually matters. — Wackymacs ( talk  ~  edits ) 08:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, but there's no actual limit - that's just a cautionary warning that the page may take longer to load because its larger in size. — Wackymacs ( talk  ~  edits ) 08:12, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * What you've done so far is excellent work; but the article has a long way to go. Contact about using the Harvnb template - he can help you with using it correctly in conjunction with the Citation template. — Wackymacs  ( talk  ~  edits ) 08:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Ancheta Wis/y
Would you be able to delete this page? You really shouldn't have copies of articles in your userspace unless they're used for sandbox purposes. In addition, i'd advise archiving your talk page; its large size makes posting awkward at best. Thanks! Ironholds 12:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:COMPUTING
I think this might interest you. We invite you to join our project ....