User talk:Chacor/Archive 08

Re:Look
Hi. I did say on the talkpage and in the edit summary that I was requesting that someone find a better source. I didn't because I didn't have much time. Also, although my userpage suggests I'm going on an RfA soon, within several months does not fit my definition of soon. Besides, my userboxes say that I'm not brave enough to nominate myself, that is, if anyone even looks at them. I know I'm not ready yet, because even yours failed, twice, and you are still more experienced at wiki than I am. Also, the reason why I use "just came upon article/page" is a long story. It started when User:Milaneus, who also vandalised my userspace and whom I know in real life, (a.k.a. 74. ... anon and later User:AudioPlague) suggested, in a heated argument off wiki that occasionally looking upon his contributions and keeping his talkpage on my watchlist was an "invasion of privacy". This resulted in a post by me to the Admins' noticeboard (which I have no time to find a diff for). The people there explained that it is wikipedia policy that contributions are freely accesible. They also said that it usually isn't considered spying unless if an editor suddenly starts editting many pages that another user has contributed to. So, I still removed the user from my watchlist and started using that in my edit summary. Now I understand that you don't like it. Is it really okay if I just suddenly edit a page I started reading and have showed no previeous interest in, and not provide a good reason in my edit summary? I only use Special:Random very occasionally, and I practically never edit a random article. Also, when you revert an edit, particularly if it's my edit, if you only explained why you reverted part of the edit, could you please also state why you reverted the other parts? For instance, I included Dean in the top template, and added a possible damages estimate. You only explained why you reverted the oil statement, but not why you reverted the rest. Erin was helping to raise the price of oil in some places, even before its formation, and now so is Dean. I am still requesting that a better source be found and added to the article. As a side note, I am surprised by how slowly updates are made on other wikipedias, so slowly that I even had to add the new info myself; on the English wiki, it is the opposite, I'm surprised by how quick it is, so that I almost never add the info myself. If I saw the info on TV, then obviously they got the news from somewhere else. We need to find that somewhere else and put it on Wikipedia. It's true that we all have different editting styles and habits on wikipedia, probably due to how our editting was influenced by early happenings as a newcomer. Thanks. ~ A H  1 (TCU) 16:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Sepat prose

 * 1) Sorry!
 * 2) Ooh, I didn't realize you used those links. My bad.
 * 3) I used a latitude/longitude distance calculator provided by the NHC for the distance from the Philippines, which has been done before without question.

Also, there is still no source for when it was named by PAGASA. My version had a fact tag next to it. I didn't realize how long it took you to make that, but you should know it took me quite some time to write that, as well. I believed mine had some more details, not to mention full cite web referencing. Besides, it was only the first two paragraphs. I'm sorry if you find that "a bit unreal and slightly rude", but, like you told me, "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it". Hurricanehink ( talk ) 02:31, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Heh, sorry, but I was at work, a little annoyed that yet another article I was making was written anew by someone else. Note to self: stop editing at work. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 02:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/BJAODN
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/BJAODN. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/BJAODN/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/BJAODN/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 16:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for looking out for me....If you want to call it that but it was nice for you to "correct" me on my error about the talk page thing, Again thanks. --Daven200520 05:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Example
So In the article when it states "The National Hurricane Committee of the Cayman Islands blocked visitors yesterday. Only returning residents and work- permit holders can enter the islands, the committee said." would that be anAction or jusy "say"?Daven200520 07:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

okay thanks
Okay thanks for the tips Ill b sure to follow them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daven200520 (talk • contribs).

Typhoon Sepak (2007)
This article falls within the Taiwan Wikiproject IN ADDITION to the Tropical Cyclones Wikiproject. For this specific storm article, you have no claim to specificity. ludahai 魯大海 15:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Fortunately, there was almost no damage where I am. Typhoons seldom bring significant damage to the Taichung area, though we were initially concerned due to forecasts that the center of the storm would come our way.  As it turned out, it went just to our south.  The Central Mountain Range and the Miaoli Hills provide significant protection to our location.  Sorry I could not help.  I would have were the situation different.  ludahai 魯大海 13:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Rebirth of Erin
What did you expect from a guy named "Crazy" who is also CANADIAN? :)--Hourick 15:54, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Dean vs Ivan comparison
I'm amazed that you could read those references so fast. If you'd been more careful you would have seen that the tracks are (up to the time cited) in agreement to within 0.5 Degrees. Calling that OR is as far a stretch as I can imagine for anyone who can do arithmetic. I made no assertion as to future behaviourLeadSongDog 18:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You cannot make the comparison yourself. THAT is the original research. Unless the NHC/TPC, or an expert, specifically says "Dean appears to be following Ivan", to make any comparison is original research. – Chacor 02:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * (above reply copied from my user talk for continuity)
 * Your assessment of OR is clearly different from mine, but I have no desire to engage in wikilawyering. In either case, I have no difficulty with constructive edits, but you chose not only to delete what you consider OR, but also the references.  If you had edited to "Dean's track is shown at (ref), compare Ivan's track shown at (ref)" or some such you could have eliminated the supposed OR without loss of content.  Simply deleting it as if it was vandalism was heavyhanded and unappreciated.  I understand you are working hard on this evolving article, but please try to keep a constructive approach.LeadSongDog 15:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You might have a look at AttributionLeadSongDog 21:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Dean template edits
I'm very curious to know why you added HurricaneWarning and Ongoing weather to Jamaica, Cayman Islands and Grand Cayman. There is no storm information in any of the three articles (HurricaneWarning refers to possible out-of-date information). The three geographic locations are not ongoing weather events either; ongoing weather should only be placed on actual weather events (and not locations affected by them unless these articles also carry current storm info, which they shouldn't - only the storm/season article should). – Chacor 14:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't add it to Jamaica, only the Cayman Islands. Once I saw it on Jamaica, I added it to the Caymans. Guess I shouldn't have. Sorry about that.-- Rob NS  16:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)