User talk:Bluemoose/archive1

Hi Bluemoose, and welcome to Wikipedia.

Thanks for finding the time to contribute to our little project. Here are some pages you might find helpful:


 * Welcome, newcomers - a general introduction, and a good starting point
 * The help centre and the FAQs
 * The Manual of Style - a guide to the community's writing style

And some quick tips:


 * When discussing something on a talk page, you can sign your name by typing four tildes after your comments, like this: ~
 * Remember to use the 'Show preview' function before saving a page
 * It's also a good idea to sign the new user log and add a little about yourself

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me at my talk page, or at the Help desk or the Village Pump.

Above all, make sure you be bold when contributing, and have fun!

– TPK 12:00, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

dichotomy
Why did you label dichotomy a language-related article? I don't see anything language-related in it. Michael Hardy 22:22, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

because its an english language word from no particular subject, hence put it in the language section. thanks for changing it if that was wrong.

Edit summaries
Hi, you're making helpful edits, but please use edit summaries, it lets us know what you've done so us experienced editors don't have to check every diff. Multiply that by the lots of us that watch these pages and you'll save a lot of people a lot of time. Just put something in like 'formatting fix' or 'grammar fix' or 'expanding a bit', or be even more detailed about what you added if you want. Thanks - Taxman 15:12, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * ok point taken - i do normally leave a quick summary, i dont if it is because i catagorised a stub or something equally minor, but i will now, thanks. Bluemoose 15:30, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

6 new stubs
Hello Bluemoose I'm sorry I didn't know what had happened... I was editing another section on that page, and that should be a bug on Wikipedia. Sorry for the trouble. &mdash; Instantnood 12:46 Mar 1 2005 (UTC)

stub categories
You wrote: hi, having sorted a lot of stubs recently i believe the need for a socio- (sociology) stub and a job- stub is becoming critical, as i really dont know how could you create these?
 * Okay - I've created one of them for now (I'm a bit short of time today... maybe I can do the other one later). is up and running, though.  Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]]
 * PS - if you sign your name ~ it'll be easier to get in touch with you! It automatically puts a link to your user page and the current time.

this is something i have been confused by, because i do sign my name like that, it just doesnt link it up, do you have any idea why this might be?
 * Hm. Bear with me while I try something... if it doesn't work, it's something to ask at Village pump (technical)
 * Nope - can't figure it out. If in doubt, ask at the pump. There's probably a glitch somewhere, and someone with a better head for the technical side than me will almost certainly be able to help there. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 09:47, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * thanks for the advice, will do Bluemoose 09:55, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stub categorising
Hello! I noticed that you - among others - had attempted to change the general stub message in Genderfuck into a more specific one. So far I have reverted all those attempts, because the categories you assigned it to were completely inappropriate. So either find a category that fits, or make one, or leave the generic stub message in absence of any usefull specific one. Thank you very much! -- AlexR 08:59, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not a "sex-stub", because genderfuck has little to do with sex (the equipment) and less with sex (the action). Whoever uses that one ought to get a grip on the differences between gender, sex (the equipment) and sex (the action).
 * It is not a "psycho-stub" because people who genderfuck hardly belong into the same category as undisputed mental illnesses. And the other articles there were about those.
 * And it is not an "lgb-stub" either, since while lgb people might do genderfuck too (although most do not), it is certainly not a matter limited to lgb people.


 * Fashion-stub would probably be closest! Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]]

Socio-stub
Just thought you'd like to know that is up and running. Grutness|hello? 06:45, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thanks a lot Bluemoose 11:08, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Trade in Services
Your wikification may have been in vain. See Deletion policy/Teletraffic Engineering. -- RHaworth 12:03, 2005 Mar 7 (UTC)

station-stub
Why did you re-add the template to the Fresh Air article (after I had removed it, the first time you added it)? The article subject is a radio program, and not a station, so this is clearly the wrong stub categorization to use. Thanks for your many other categorizations though; everything else I looked at appeared to be accurate :)  ~leif &#9786; HELO 18:07, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * sorry, its because when you search for radio on the list of stubs it gives you that stub, does this call for a radio program stub? Bluemoose 21:13, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

america, cambridgeshire
The article is linked too from 'List of unusual place names' or somesuch. I don't know whether it's a real place or not, though there are villages called America in the UK. I simply assumed that since it was already linked to it was areal place, and so linked to it from the Cambridgeshire page. If it's not real then the links to it need removing from several locations Grunners 15:46, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Namboothiris are not mythological :)
Hello Bluemoose,

I just wanted to let you know why I'm changing the category in the Namboothiris article. They are far from mythological! They're an actual caste in the Southern Indian state of Kerala. Vivin Paliath ( വിവിന് പാലിയത് ) 00:45, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Perfect information
Hi Bluemoose. Thanks for the thanks!

I shifted the content of perfect information onto a new page about complete information because the article described complete rather than perfect information. The difference is that in a game with perfect information all the players know what actions other players have taken in the past. With complete information, every player knows what sort of game they're playing. All players know the payoffs, what actions are available to their opponents (what their opponents' types are) and so on. Scrabble and poker are not examples of imperfect information because every action is observed by the other players. For example if I discard 3 cards you know I've discarded 3 cards. However, they are examples of incomplete information because not everybody's cards (or tiles) are on the table (face up). You don't know which 3 cards I've discarded. I can't think of many recreational (board or parlour) games that have imperfect information. In fact, I can't think of any off the top of my head! Hide-and-seek, perhaps, that great game of strategy! Treborbassett 16:27, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I've just noticed you have a degree in economics. The above wasn't intended to patronise! Treborbassett 16:31, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stubbing
Hi there! I have not had the chance to respond to your msg earlier, sorry for the delay. However, despite what you say, I have not been stubbing since that message, having had other things on my hands. However, I've done a lot of stubbing (a full run of Deadend pages) so you're likely to run into more of it. Other than that, you're right about me having to memorize more stub categories (which I'm working on).

Given the size of a stub it really doesn't matter if the notice is at the top or the bottom, though, so I fail to see why that's a problem. And yes, I believe Hypaxial muscles is a Wiktionary candidate, since you agree it's only a definition. Just because something is added to Wiktionary doesn't mean it has to be deleted here (see Category_talk:Move_to_Wiktionary). Radiant_* 14:51, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

My User Page Riddle
That is indeed the correct answer. Remuel 04:48, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Economics-related articles
I'll look into this when I have time. Thanks for the links. Treborbassett 15:27, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Your comments on my talk page
Hey, what did you mean about my tag usage? -Grick 07:07, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

B-actor stub categorization
Hi. I'm thinking that B-actor might be stubbed into the "filming-stub" category either in place of or in addition to the "actor-stub" category. My thinking is that the definition of a B-actor depends on the definition of a B-movie, which would be associated with the "filming-stub" category. I've not double-stubbed yet as I thought I'd ask your opinion first.

Regards, Courtland 03:16, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)

Marginal benefit/marginal utility
I think how these terms are used varies in economic literature anyway. I'd say that marginal benefit is possibly a broader term than marginal utility since one might talk of the marginal utility of/to a user, but probably not a firm; whereas one could use marginal benefit for both. Also, benefit is essentially the 'opposite' of cost, but utility has a more specific meaning.

However, I don't think they merit separate articles and any difference between their meanings could be made adequately clear in one article. Treborbassett 09:39, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Economics Categories
Howdy, Bluemoose. I've come across your name a few times in economics articles, usually fixing categorization. I made a post on the Finance, Business, and Economics category talk pages about trying to get a group of users together to do a big category sort all at once. Since there's a lot of duplication among those three cats, it makes sense to work together. Feco 09:00, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

thanks....
....for improving my article on Comberton. I took your advice and added the data-table to the other village article I recently created, Trebetherick. I have a question though. You say "please add this to all villages/towns/cities" - how come other small villages like Coton and Bourn have this table, yet cities like Durham or even London (!!) do not? Is this just an error/oversight, or is there some sort of "threshold"? Apologies if this isnt the right place to ask, as you will see I am rather new to Wikipedia. Cheers. Stevekeiretsu 18:06, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

PS. On a personal note, I've just noticed you have Hills Road 6th Form in your "To Do" list, did you go there? I did, and was born 1981, so we may well have been there at the same time! Small world eh...


 * CVC as well!!? No s**t!  Yup... me too.  That's crazy :)

Reply to quiry last month
Been a while since I've logged on, sorry it took so long to get back to you

For populations of the villages you asked about, try: http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/Default.asp?nsid=false&CE=True&SE=True

Oh, and further to the person above, I'm currently at HRSFC...

Burwellian

Census data
Hello bluemoose, I noticed that for the Duxford page you added the data table for the page. I like that table and have used it in three other pages, Clifton Reynes, Olney, Milton Keynes and Newport Pagnell. But I cannot work out how to get population figures for those places, or any places for that matter. So how did you get that census data for the duxford page? Thanks Borb 13:50, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply! The reply is over at my talk page if anyone else sees this and is interested. Borb 14:05, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, I left you a note on Talk:Perfect_competition, then I noticed your self introduction: "I am neither blue or a moose, but I am a male born in 1982 with a degree in economics, hence most of my contributions are economics and finance based", which, to my surpirse, contains statements all true of me as well. Funny coincidence. Did you see International_trade, it needs some work, if you feel up to it.Mgw 19:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of places in England
Hmm, yes. It's a messy mix of traditional and administrative and ceremonial counties. Yuk. My thoughts are:
 * There are too many Administrative counties of England and they do not map well with people's expectation of "counties" by dividing places like East & West Sessex.
 * Traditional counties are vague, and it is long since Northuberland owned Tyneside, for instance
 * That leaves us with Ceremonial counties ... we could change all the List of Places pages such that they mapped to the ceremonials, since there are not too many of them
 * Or else we could do some hybrid.

Whatever we choose, I think we should be clear as to which of these schemes we are using, in the text of the List of places in England page, and in each List of places in County. My vote would be to go for a hybrid, of Ceremonial counties with exceptions for East & West Sussex (combine into Sussex) and the Yorkshires (again, combine). Don't know if there are any other diffs between the ceremonial list and the List of places in England list.

Does this help? --Tagishsimon (talk)


 * There are 10 mismatches, if we assume London = Greater London, and Durham = County Durham


 * Values in Ceremonial and not in List Of:
 * Bristol
 * East Riding of Yorkshire
 * North Yorkshire
 * South Yorkshire
 * West Yorkshire


 * Values in List Of but not in Ceremonial :


 * Humberside
 * Huntingdonshire
 * Middlesex
 * Westmorland
 * Yorkshire


 * Sigh. Bound to offend someone, whatever you do :) --Tagishsimon (talk)


 * We might as well go the whole hog and divide the Yorkshire page into four. I've added a (presumably red) link for Bristol. And edited the main page, and might fiddle on for a bit or give up for the night. I'll put something on the main page's talk page to account for what's been done. We also need to standarise and if necessary clarify the first few lines of each List of places in Buckinghamshire page so everyone knows the basis of the geographic division. But note the Bucks list deals well with its shifting boundaries - the idea of putting in italic places that used to be in the traditional county but which are not in the ceremonial has merit. Hmm. --Tagishsimon (talk)


 * Yup, but it might take me a day or so to get around to it. Busy(ish). --Tagishsimon (talk)

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland look better:


 * List of places in Northern Ireland and Northern Ireland#The Counties in Northern Ireland. Six counties versus 26 local authorities. Probably go with Counties. Pages need creating, with a standardised header section describing the list.
 * List of places in Wales and Subdivisions of Wales versus Traditional counties of Wales. Seems to be using the Subdivisions of Wales, which are the current local government areas. Again, so long as we say this on the top of each List Of page and point the page back at the Subdivisions of Wales page then we'll be fine.
 * List of places in Scotland versus Regions of Scotland ... not checked in detail, but roughly map. Thank the lord, since there also seem to be: Traditional counties of Scotland versus Administrative counties of Scotland, Lieutenancy areas of Scotland, Subdivisions of Scotland. Normal deal, need to define on the List of page what the geographical division is. --Tagishsimon (talk)..

Hi, I noticed a while back you were considering starting a WikiProject for this? I recently started WikiProject UK geography with a wider remit, but which might be able to help coordinate the lists. Joe D (t) 11:35, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

bed sheet
Toolstub! Wow. A bit of a stretch, but I'll nod to that. That article left me stumped on what stub to assign! -- TheBlunderbuss 20:07, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Gastric acid and juice
So much could be told about gastric acid that I don't believe it would be sensible to merge its article with "gastric juice". The regulation of its secretion, the mechanisms that protect gastric mucosa and the disorders make it an extensive topic. It would be fine, however, to transform the article "gastric juice" in such a way that it presents in short all the major constituents and offers links to specific articles about them. Perhaps the best thing would be to have one article for "gastric acid", one for "gastric enzymes" and one general for "gastric juice". --Eleassar777 21:20, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Aircraft Photography
Please have a look at User talk:Arpingstone for my (very late) reply to your question about aircraft photography - Adrian Pingstone 19:21, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Dynamic inconsistency and incredible threats
I think it's fine for there to be a separate page for non-credible threats. However, I think you're mistaken in saying that they're not closely related enough. An incredible threat is a form of dynamic inconsistency. --Treborbassett 16:01, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Shylocking
"edirects may be cheap, but be careful how you use them, Shylock (Shakespeare) has nothing to do with Shylocking, other than one term is derived from the other."

It's a little stronger than that; shylocking is an eponym. I'll grant you that the redirect isn't that hot, but Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The article as you've established it is a dictdef, much like it was before. Since I saw no possible way of ever expanding that to a full article, I redirected. I stil see no way to expand it, and at present it doesn't even mention the Shakespeare connection, which is quite obviously the word's main clame to fame.

Note that I destroyed no information in redirecting. I was careful to add this information to the page on the character. If you really think this article has value on its own, I'll respect your judgement, but don't be surprised if others come along and slap &#123;&#123;dict&#125;&#125; on it. JRM · Talk 09:20, 2005 May 13 (UTC)

Discretionary income
I honestly think you just don't want your article just to be a definition so you take my article's work into your definition. If what Tannin says is true then maybe both our pages shouldn't exist. Plus I had more to add to discretionary income anyway. AyrtonSenna

Yeah, but you just took my work in order to make yours not a definition anymore. AyrtonSenna

Well, thanks for the help then. AyrtonSenna

Thanks for correcting my spelling - and a pre-emptive defense of "term definition"
Hi Bluemoose,

I appreciate you removing the typos from some of my edits, Bluemoose.

It seems that some of the contributors here have discussed the Wikimedia edict not to write articles "defining terms". I tried to obey this rule until I realized that it fundamentally meaningless; every article defines a term. Even if some distinction could be drawn it would not help the encyclopedia because the Wiktionary isn't the place for complicated jargon.

If the "no term-definition" rule were rigidly enforced it would mean that every article using the words "Superior goods" would have to define what the phrase meant; this is a problem because:
 * 1) It means different things to different people, and therefore leads to internal inconsistency in Wikipedia.
 * 2) It wastes valuable reading-time in complex articles; the advantage of a hyper-text encyclopedia is that the novice reader can instantly lookup terms they don't understand, where the expert will only need to know what's new on a page.
 * 3) A "term" might seem to require only a simple definition, but infact there's a vast amount to say about everything. Over time, the "history of a term" may become an interesting article in itself.

Cheers, Wragge 14:31, 2005 May 16 (UTC)


 * I've made a start on Solow residual, but I'll need to come back to this later. What do you think about naming conventions in this field?

Wragge 22:37, 2005 May 19 (UTC)

Latitude/longitude in infoboxes
Hi Bluemoose. I like all the uk infoboxes you've been adding, so keep up the excellent work. One thing I noticed, however, is that in most of the Cambridgeshire village boxes (and possibly elsewhere, I don't know), you've added the longitude as West rather than East. I've been correcting them when I've spotted them (eg ->, but thought I'd let you know, as the map link comes out wrong. Smb1001 21:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, they're N and W on multimap, but the longitude on Cambridgeshire is negative, meaning east. Not to worry. Smb1001 12:30, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Small mistake with the humanbot
Hi Bluemoose - just to let you know I reverted a change you made using humanbot to Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. When I saw the edit summary ("could of -> could have") I was horrified that I could have made that mistake, or let it remain, when I was working on the article, but thankfully further checking revealed it was part of a sentence reading "while this could of course be...", so 'could of...' was correct. Just wanted to let you know so you don't think I'm defending a grammatical howler :) Worldtraveller 15:06, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User:Humanbot update 03 June 2005
On this day version two is released of the client-side User:Humanbot script. It allows you to browse the English Wikipedia on other tabs and edit it normally. en:User:Humanbot. r3m0t talk 09:46, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)