User talk:BluePlatypus

Thanks for the note on my talk page
I actually chose my nick because of, of all things, my favorite stuffed animal, though she's actually more of a "magenta monotreme" than a purple platypus. (It's a larget version of Patti, one of the original Beanie Babies.) I also figured a goofy nick might help people take my comments, some of which can seem a bit abrasive to people who don't know me well, in something closer to the intended light. PurplePlatypus 18:29, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Kensington Runestone
There may be no need for the dispute tag. Please list your concerns on the talk page first. If we can't resolve them, then we put up a dispute tag, ok? Wyss 21:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok, well I left some of my concerns on the talk page. If the tag really bothers you, remove it. But I still feel the issues need to be adressed. --BluePlatypus 21:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

user page?
I was wondering why you didnt have a Userpage. --  Rohit 18:08, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't know I needed one. :) But more probably because I prefer to be semi-anonymous. I also believe in the idea that it's what you say that counts, not who said it. I try to avoid appealing to authority. Why? Anything you're curious about? --BluePlatypus 18:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * And your signature in WP:RD shows a different colour. That's lesser anonymity. --DLL 22:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Better so? --BluePlatypus 23:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Cheers from JackofOz
Hi, BluePlatypus. Let’s not let this go any further. I strive to have good relations with my Wiki colleagues, and you are no exception. I guess from your name that you’re an Aussie, so even more reason to stay mates.

I’ve already publicly apologized for my statement that you called "arrogant", and I wasn’t intending to reopen that issue.

I was merely commenting on your apparent propensity to use pejorative labels, like "arrogant" and "pretentious". I certainly do appreciate the difference between a personal criticism, and a criticism of a person’s actions. But using labels to make a criticism - even of actions - has little or no value. It places you in a more intellectually superior position, one where you can look down and decide what something is. That's not what this is about. If you want to disagree with someone’s statement, or want to add something to it, do so, but that can be done just as well without labelling it as any particular thing. Even calling someone’s contribution something positive (eg. “excellent”) is just as judgmental as calling it something negative (eg. “arrogant”). Best to avoid such terms altogether, in my view.


 * Did you notice the delicious irony, by the way? I asked you to refrain from characterising other people's contributions in pejorative terms.  Your response was to … guess what, characterise my earlier statement in pejorative terms, That's because your answer the other day was arrogant.  I love it.  I might keep that one for posterity.

I hope I’m not sounding preachy. God knows I fail daily, mea culpa. I would just caution you to be careful of practising what you preach, otherwise karma will come back and bite you. Let me give you an example. At the Science reference page, you made the statement that No mental disease or disorder can be diagnosed merely from a single symptom. There’s a separate debate about that. I haven’t said so in that debate, but I will say here privately that, despite (or perhaps because of) you acknowledging up front that you have no expertise in psychiatry, I still think this is bordering very, very close to being what one might term "pretentious". I’ve told you above why I wouldn’t normally use such language – I just use it here to illustrate my point. But if you’re going to continue to use such terms, you have to make sure you own backyard is squeaky clean. That’s all.

Oh, I would also ask that if you’re going to quote me (as in, using inverted commas), please use my exact, verbatim words – otherwise you’re making an untrue statement about what I actually said. What I said was Now you're all just making it up as you go along, which I followed with 2 other sentences. You’ve translated this into nothing more than "You don't know what you are talking about". Hardly the same things, are they? Cheers, mate JackofOz 03:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Let what go any further? I'm sorry, but the only impression I have of what's going on here is that you're pissed off about me criticizing your astrology crap, and now you've decided to go pick a fight with me wherever you can, by making off-topic replys on the Reference Desk, and now by leaving messages on this talk page. I think that's childish behaviour. But now that you've convinced yourself now of how evil, stupid and hypocritical I am, then I hope you can move on and let me continue to make comments without you standing over my shoulder to nit-pick at them.

You wrote: ''Do your research, study the subject, then make comments. Uneducated comments can sometimes be quite amusing, but on this occasion ....? Nah.''. That is arrogant. Most people would agree that is an arrogant response. I said it was arrogant, and I stand by that. And now you criticize me for being pejorative. Pluck the beam from your own eye, dude. --BluePlatypus 12:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, that sure didn't get the response I was hoping for. But I am letting go and moving on.   JackofOz 05:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Well perhaps next time you should say what you want, e.g. "I'm angry at you and demand an apology!" instead of that holier-than-thou act, because noone's buying it. I do not think many people would find that comment pretentious. (Which the dictionary tells me means: "Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified."). Given that I wrote "I am not a psychiatrist", I would say it's anything but pretentious. Most of the responses on the Reference Desk are made by non-experts. Most of them do not openly acknowledge any lack of education on the subject. So by your standards, most people answering questions there are far more pretentious than I.


 * Of course, the truth is that this has nothing to do with my comments in themselves. You are the only one who has found them objectionable, while several others have voiced support of what I've said. I don't see you raising similar objections to similar responses from other people either. It's pretty obvious you're the one with an axe to grind here. In the future, I'd appreciate it if you'd be upfront about it instead though, instead of starting these tedious arguments that noone is buying into. --BluePlatypus 13:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi. I wasn't ignoring you, I really had moved on. I see no value in going over old ground any more.  I had forgotten to take you off my watchlist and the posting below brought you up again, so I just peeked in out of curiosity.  I have learned many things from recent events.  One lesson is to accept responsibility for the consequences of my statements, whatever merit they may have in themselves.  JackofOz 03:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

hi!
Hey BluePlatypus! I just asked Marskell how old was he because I think he is smart ( well actually it was a quote on his user page that lead me to believe that) and I wanna ask you the same thing because I also think you are smart haha :|... not that age has a lot to do with brains though, but I'm curious.--Cosmic girl 01:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Reference Desk
Having read two recent responses of yours (to the question apropros of one's ability, having been well-versed in grammar, to break the conventions of grammar for literary effect and to the proselytzing Christian polemic) at the Reference Desk, I am moved to write to commend you not only for the salient sublimity of your answers but also for the perspicacious and pithy nature of those answers. Inamsuch as the first contact prospective Wikipedians might have with the sundry Wiki media is at the Reference Desk, it is additionally to your credit that you take care to write so well there. Cordially, Joe 01:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. :) --BluePlatypus 02:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm....
--HappyCamper 13:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, --HappyCamper 13:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I did not say BP. man you made something wrong about your Math. I just sensed you told me those in wrong ways,worng time,wrong treatments . If today someone told you're wrong even you had tried your best,how's your feeling? Get hurt? Or in imnormal happyly? Too strange,so? Your pride should be stopped. Look back what USA educations brought you have been. Respecting with or ignoring others' feeling,or just keeping your-self in the world center?--HydrogenSu 15:10, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


 * That is your problem, HydrogenSu. If you ask "Is this right?" and it isn't, then are people supposed to tell you? Should we lie to you just to make you happy? Do you think your university teachers are going to do the same? You're right. I don't care about your feelings. Those feelings won't help you pass courses, or get into university, or get a job. You know, I've taught physics at a university. (which was not in the USA). One thing you learn teaching is how to tell what the person knows from the questions they ask. The questions you ask give me the impression you have missed some of the basics, and that's the reason you're making mistakes now. So am I supposed to lie to you? Just because your feelings will be hurt if I tell you "Go back and look in the book"? Grow up and stop taking this stuff so personally. --BluePlatypus 15:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion given to BP guy
BluePlatypus guy,please learn about Laplace transform and do not be nonsense here. --HydrogenSu 08:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If you had had learned about it, you wouldn't say $$L(a^t)$$ solving my that day question was wrong.--HydrogenSu 08:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it was wrong. However, the Laplace transform is an integral. It doesn't, in itself, help you solve them. If someone asks "How do I show that some integral has this value?", Then I assume they're asking how to calculate the integral. So the intended solution to your homework problem involved identifying a certain integral as the equivalent of a Laplace transform and looking it up in a table of Laplace transforms. That doesn't make my answer wrong. I'd say it was the better answer, because "Look it up in a table of integrals" isn't what most people want when they're asking that kind of question. But since you've said you're not interested in what I have to say, perhaps someone else should explain this. --BluePlatypus 10:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I already did, years ago. What's your point? I don't think I've responded to any question on the Laplace transform, ever. Note: This is not a message board. If you have something to say to me personally, use my user talk page. --BluePlatypus 08:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

--HydrogenSu 13:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You said that : As I try giving you advise ,I must do it on your talk page. But please look at back to yoursefl. Can you make it same too? You had given me some “usefuless” advises on-and-on recently and on-and-on made me angry. You just the only man who is always wasting my time. Not myself.  Please /ok? / do not once again lie to all men. Or God won’t forgive you this guy.


 * I don't understand most of what you've written above. I haven't lied to anyone. You are angry? What reason do you have to be angry with me? Because you disagree with my advice? --BluePlatypus 15:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I just was angry with some of your wrong ways advise. Are you very young! So you talked everything rude,and you seem to be afraid of my talking about "God"....--HydrogenSu 15:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Your statements really do stand for themselves. HydrogenSu. --BluePlatypus 15:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Haha, I saw this linked on the reference desk. This hydrogensu is quite a character... --JianLi 21:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast!
The Gods work in mysterious ways! I knew there would be more than the inaugural two members of that category, but had not dared hope to see more so soon. Keep them coming! BTW, in creating the category, I miscapitalized restorations, but don't see the move option. Do you know how to fix? -SM 19:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, alas, you can't move or rename a category page, it seems. I don't think it matters much though, although if you want to change it, it'd be best to do it now before it means changing too many pages. --BluePlatypus 19:53, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Reference Desk trolls
I was trying to check up on Name2354325's contributions, and wasted five minutes trying to find the thread "Why do people always seems to persecute christians?" on RD/H and in the archives before I eventually discovered you'd deleted it. So while I understand why you did, I guess I wish you hadn't. —Steve Summit (talk) 14:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Right. Sorry if it caused any confusion, I don't really like removing other people's comments, but in this case it seemed to be a quite clear-cut case of trolling. (there were 2-3 other messages of the same nature from the same user in a short timeframe) I do try to follow procedure and left a warning on the user's talk page. --BluePlatypus 15:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Page Blanking of LKML Talk Page
Please do not remove discussion materials from the talk page for LKML, its page blanking and possibly vandalism. Thanks. Waya sahoni 18:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't be ridiculous. It was a cut-and-pasted copy of another Wikipedia page, I removed it an added a link as to not clutter up the Talk page with text that need not be there. Which can be a form of vandalism in itself. --BluePlatypus 18:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * There's no link to the content. This is a blatant misrepresentation.  Please don't vandalize and page blank the talk page again. Waya sahoni 18:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I did add a link to the content, both times I removed your cut-and-pasted text, I added a link to the page where it originated, namely the Jeff Merkey article. The page history will show that. --BluePlatypus 18:36, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Page blanking of discussion and removal of discussion materials from a Talk Page at talk:LKML. Second request for use to stop. Waya sahoni 18:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

The materials will be merged back into that article tommorrow. Please do not page blank the talk page for article again. Thanks. Waya sahoni 18:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I will continue to remove it unless you can give a reason why the LKML talk page should contain a copy of the the Jeff Merkey article. You're being completely unresonable here, by calling me a "page blanking vandal" without even attempting to make a point on why that material needs to be there. Wikiquette says you should be curtious and assume good faith, but to me it looks like you're using this vandalism claim as an excuse to not need to explain your actions. That's not how it works. --BluePlatypus 18:36, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Page blanking a talk page is vandalism because it removes the materials from discussion and prevents editors from reviewing and restructuring the materials and trying to agree. What you did is point a link to the main article, which should not be used as a "discussion" page on whether or not the materials should be merged into LKML.  It's ok. each time you remove it, I will report you for vandalism until you stop.  Thanks.  Waya sahoni 18:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I did not blank the talk page. I removed the part you cut-and-pasted from the Merkey article. Secondly, the main article is almost always used as a reference for discussions of merging. That's how the merge tags work on Wikipedia. Go look at any article that have been merged, and you'll find that it's been done with a merge tag. It is not done by cut-and-pasting the entire article to the talk page. Please follow the proper procedure if you want to suggest a merge, by adding a merge tag to the article and let people discuss it on the talk page. Don't clutter up the talk page with off-topic material like that. If you want to report me for 'vandalism' I welcome it. --BluePlatypus 18:47, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, I added a merge tag to the Merkey article for you, where it should be. Now please follow the routine layed out at WP:MM and discuss why you think it should be merged. --BluePlatypus 19:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I apreciate your willingness to follow the processes to review the materials. Waya sahoni 19:18, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reference desk contributions
I've admired and appreciated your contributions to humanities and language and now I see your posts at the science desk too. A polymath! Thank you. So why don't you want to say anything about yourself on your user page? --Halcatalyst 02:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, thank you too! Here's some info: Science is actually my main subject (in terms of amount of education). So my edits reflect that, in the sense that I don't edit as much on science subjects! I do enough science at work. :) Anyway, I prefer anonymity because first, I don't really like appeals to authority, and anonymity is a good way to stop me from doing it. But it also stops having my authority challenged, and from personal attacks. Second, I simply value privacy, I've got a pretty unusual job, and a very unique name. Googling for my surname in its current spelling will only result in hits pertaining to my immediate family. So naturally I'd want to be a bit careful about what gets associated with that online. (In particular since I predict what goes online in Wikipedia, will stay online. For a long time.) --BluePlatypus 03:18, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Not that I'm making edits anonymously that I wouldn't admit to having made in person. :) --BluePlatypus 03:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Those sound like good motives to me. It's just that when people make consistently outstanding contributions, as you do, one wants to know more about the person. --Halcatalyst 05:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you aware of this Wikipedia talk:Censorship ?
For myself, I would like to say that the method is not innocent. The subject is truly important : there is one talk page and twoscore people discussing auto censorship for one million (counting non active users). Will you give your advice ? --DLL 20:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Ricin
I write to compliment you on and for your excellent comments at Talk:ricin. Both at the Reference Desk and on the talk page, the question as to the propriety of the article's including relatively specific directions for the production of reference was posed as what is surely a false dilemma, viz., either that one opposes the inclusion of the directions in view of their prospective use by, inter al., terrorists (or, at the very least, in view of the "image problem" that possibility creates for Wikipedia) or that one supports the inclusion of the directions on the grounds that Wikipedia is not censored (or, at the very least, that the information is readily available elsewhere and our concern must be for the dissemination of info above all else). As you have illustrated, there is an additional side, to-wit, that, the former grounds notwithstanding (it would be wholly stupid, to pick a relatively blunt term, to delete the material simply because it might aid terrorists), the information doesn't belong in the article because it's unencyclopedic and exorbitantly detailed (I assume, though I have yet to check, that our articles about similarly-styled substances don't have directions for creating them). In any case, thanks for adding some sanity to a debate that certainly might have gone down indecorous or intellectually infirm roads. Joe 06:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

SEC
Hi- I responded to your comment to my question on the science ref desk (SEC to desalt proteins). If you can answer my question now, please do. Thanks, ike9898 20:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Black hole question
Thank you for your answer. Finally my childhood fear of everything being eaten by a gigantic black hole can be put to rest. = ) Kind regards, Gallaghp

Dutch Cold Packs
Hi. I just saw your contribution to the Dutch Cold Pack question on the reference desk. You seem to have some command of the Dutch language, which I find very admirable. Indeed, I find it exceedingly admirable; as it happens, I'm trying to have a few lines of songtext translated and by now I'm near to despairing. We're going to do a public reading in Vienna next weekend, and I'd dearly like to contribute mock-serious analysis of one truly silly Dutch song containing hilarious animals noises and atrocious carnival style music. I'm going to post it in the language help desk, as a last resort. Maybe you might like to take a look at it? Yours, --Dr. Zarkov 01:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I did. Posted my answer there. Not much I could add though. I "aquired" the song and listened to it too.. I can see why it's hard to get the lyrics for it.. It isn't easy to hear what he's saying in those strange portions. --BluePlatypus 07:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the effort, anyway. I was told the lyrics are not in standard Dutch, but in brabant dialect, which seems to complicate things somewhat. By now it seems to me, the less you understand of the lyrics, the more amusing is the song... --Dr. Zarkov 19:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Interesting! But did you get any clarity into what they actually are? Now I'm curious.. :) --BluePlatypus 20:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Central Asia
Hi, I'm trying to start some sort of working group to improve the coverage of Central Asia and related topics in Wikipedia. Leave a message on my userpage if you're interested. Aelfthrytha 04:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back (?)
Welcome back, BluePlatypus! (If you're not sockpuppetteering for your purple cousin, that is.) DirkvdM 05:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! :) --BluePlatypus 21:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Vasa (ship) at FAC
Since you've shown interest or made some contributions to Vasa (ship), I'd like to notify you that it has been nominated as an FAC. Your insights and comments would be much appreciated there.

Peter Isotalo 14:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)