User talk:Crispmuncher/Archive 1

MMB
Hey! Thanks for creating the MMB page; i had put it on a vague list of things to do, but i'm glad someone beat me to it. Cheers, Lindsay 12:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It had been annoying me ever since I first noticed it a couple of months ago. I put off creating a page though because I couldn't be bothered tracking down the required information - it is not something I am expert on at all.  Hopefully it will get filled out in the fullness of time - I have already transferred some material from the Dairy Crest page as it was actually about the MMB. CrispMuncher (talk) 21:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Well at least you're a fellow smoker
re:

Thanks for the courtesy... admittedly, I was late night winging it, but back in the days I did microprocessor designs (5) load capacitance was a big deal in board layout design and remedial measures. Doubly so in backplane architectures, so perhaps MOS technology has improved... it's been a while since I looked at any chips specs--well over a decade and a half now that I think about it.

Admittedly chip technology has advanced a few quantum, and runs are so much shorter now that much is no longer a first order effect but it was also my understanding that data through rates were still clocked way below processor tic rates. I KNOW my desktop, with 2Ghz processor has a data clock of 4Mhz, so perhaps you need to check a bit further before throwing out that baby with the bath water. Perhaps 4 Mhz is no longer the ceiling, but then I've been away from hardware aspects for a long while.

The excess-to-and-off-topic is admittedly something I knew, but at that hour, after 15-20 phrasings and rephrasings and moving this sentence there or here... figured I'd revise and extend some other day. Frankly, it was a very unplanned edit, solely triggered by the fact that I WAS AND AM TOTALLY AMAZED such fundamentals weren't covered exhaustively AND WELL three or four years back. See Data bus for a good CRY. Don't look hard... it's not there, and neither is I/O bus that I can find. Bus (computing) is so busy linking other articles it doesn't educate either. Last I looked we were an educational project of an educational foundation... has that changed?

So far as I can see the article is very poor as is... so fix it. It really doesn't convey to anyone outside the computer fields anything about how a bus works and why its important...

Your VESA local bus reference is really off point. Local bus optimized for word DMA transfers is not the main memory address bus, but I am and was aware there a are a relatively few installations using full word addressing without byte capability... THAT is information that should be buried if mentioned at all... why confuse people you're trying to give the basics.

As the article stands, on a quality scale 1-5, it tops out at .5, so you want to revert... I don't revert. But suggest you get your writers hat on and start servicing the customers per WP:NOT PAPERS. ANY IDIOT trained in the field can through jargon into a page. It takes skilled writing and a lot of effort to convey information clearly that is not depedent upon linking to get the gist across so Johnny Nineyearsold can see whats what. I tend to avoid professional topics for ones more in line with avocations like geology and history, but if computer topics go on needing TLC, you'll see me take a hand when needed. I've already put data bus on my TO-DO Bookmarks, surprise me and beat me to it. Sorry about the delay, I saw your post immediately upon arrival, but have been busy here, on the commons and wikiversity with ongoing matters. One of those on Wikiversity lead me to this edit. Nuf said. // Fra nkB 05:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

ping!. I'm a bit overbusy! //Fra nkB 22:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Crisp muncher u idiot
This is not disruptive: "You should stay safe with solder irons.do not touch anything unnecessary with the soldering irons." How is that disruptive


 * Where did I state that is disruptive? As I indicated in the edit summary this in advisory material that does not belong in an encyclopaedia.  The vandalism warning was for your earlier edit to the same article which I only noticed later.  How is including a picture of a Manchester United kit here not disruptive?  CrispMuncher (talk) 21:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: RM
Oh bloody hell you're right. That'll teach me to edit at 2am. Excuse me while I go fix all of that (also, I did try to keep the Research Machines name on some articles where it would be historically correct, I guess I missed some of those too). --carelesshx talk 11:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

THANKS for fair warning!!!! (Windows 3.x)
Its extremely considerate to post in both discussion page and mine before reverting-- Although I would much rather you rewrite and/or correct elements you find objectionable. Please google "AARD code." I reviewed Wikipedia notability guidelines, so I base my edits here on published sources, not on flow or aesthetics of prose! I don't think the controversy can be explained with a simple statement and redirect to AARD code article, although feel free to make a case on the discussion page then follow your bliss. Yes I have a bias against M$, but I also have to wonder if you are a Microsoft apologist of sorts! I am certainly willing to accept selective edits based on NPOV, although realize AARD the basis for a settled lawsuit-- I have a wealth of info to draw upon. I think it is also a precedent for Microsoft's anticompetitive antitrust convictions- these aren't merely point-of-view biases!! Cheers! Cuvtixo (talk) 15:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * ahyuh, I've been in the White Mountains, NH with no internet, (locals told me "you can't get there from here!" ;) That's a little N.Hampshire backcountry joke) but I'm reading you're discussion comments now, thanks. Cuvtixo (talk) 18:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA question
Thanks a lot for that, fixed.  Ase 'nine ' '' 20:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Hiya. I've granted the rollback flag. Please remember to use it only for blatant vandalism. You can learn more at WP:RBK or feel free to ask me for any help. Thanks for your work so far and Happy Editing! Pedro : Chat  18:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

USB Flash Drive
Oops! Yeah, now that you mentioned it and I've had a chance to re-examine the page, you're correct. I feel rather dumb because I removed the tag thinking I was editing the article for external HDDs which in some cases, do require 2 ports. ⒺⓋⒾ ⓁⒼⓄ ⒽⒶⓃ ② talk 00:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Preston
Re: Tulketh Mill chimney - many thanks for your correction. Do you think it warrants the addition of an image? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes I agree. Am embedded link is a neater idea. Or even starting a new article. Thanks anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank You
My apologies regarding Brian Regan. I was scanning wikipedia and found somebody had reverted ME! I thought this was strange as I have no history of vandalising and have no intention of ever doing so, and to prove this I have been granted Rollback rights which is most likely why our edits conflicted. I am hoping currently that the article is in a satisfactory state. Once again, sorry. Limideen 16:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC) 16:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Santa Cruz Operation
Thanks for letting my know about this. I'm usually wary of random I.P.s making accusations on pages, but you can never really take copyright concerns too seriously, so I thought I'd investigate further. Good news for me, now I don't have to go through rooting out copyrighted text from the article! :) Thanks again, – Toon (talk)  13:52, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Knife legislation
I noticed you edited my paragraph because of 'apparent tautology'. The reason I put it in there is because one can actually possess prohibited weapons (despite 'prohibited' - it's confusing), in so far for grandfathered privileges and those who have peace officer status. --Cahk (talk) 22:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Technically 'prohibited weapons' are well .. prohibited but the Firearms Act allows for the Commissioner of Firearms to issue a license for the possession of such weapon but it's illegal for anyone (except law enforcement) to acquire or import prohibited weapons into Canada. The wording is pretty confusing unless you actually read the legislation itself. Cheers, --Cahk (talk) 18:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

New Deal (United Kingdom)
Ack, I ballsed that one up. Thanks for catching it. --Blowdart | talk 20:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Of recent Dobsonian edits
Could you have a look at this report and comment if you think it has merit/is worth commenting about. I could always use a reality check. thanks Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ty for the dig and comment. Hmmm.... RIT... a school with a big film making department, and this account seems to be a SPA that put up an article on a film maker. Gives another connection and reasons for socks. It's probably academic since this dif nailed a puppet master. Comment left at Dobsonian BTW. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 20:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar
I'm not entirely sure where I'll wear it (my lapel is full of pin badges from '80s bands and a certain football club) but I'm very grateful for the Original Barnstar. Cheers. Longwayround (talk) 11:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Helping with composite images discussion
Hello, thank you for helping 3O composite images discussion. We need to move it outside, because we are not able to solve it in WikiProject Gastropods. I personally suppose to move it to Wikipedia talk:Image use policy. I suppose that WikiProject Tree of life will not be able to solve it solely, because it can get into the same situation as we. Announcement on WikiProject Tree of life will be fine. I can move it by myself also. Or I can move it and you can correct everything in my actions to be done independently. Or rather move it anywhere you want to. Can you do it, please? Be bold and tell me/us your decision. Thank you. I think that nobody is feeling "injured", that there is no problem with archiving (we can discuss about archived themes), that there was enough time to discussion for both sides. Personally I think, that there are nearly impossible things to compare like rules, aesthetic feelings, long-time and short time strategies, and so on. I think that this task covers broader/wider number of themes, than we even mentioned. That is why it is this task so difficult and that is why we did not reach concensus yet. So I am glad for your help. Have a nice weekend. --Snek01 (talk) 17:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Frank Tipler opinion
Just to let you know that the IP replied. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 05:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I noticed that yesterday. I just didn't do anything with it since there is a lot to go through there.   Even now I still don't get it but I'm going to break it into manageable chunks.  It may take longer but I think it's the only way we'll settle the matter. CrispMuncher (talk) 17:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC).

Thanks for the 3O on Suzuki RF400R
Just wanted to say thanks. It was good to have somebody who wasn't involved have a look at it. – PranksterTurtle (talk) 03:08, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

What did I do?
Why you say that my edits were...wrong. What page are you telling me about? Wrssrir

Thanks for third opinion on Bank charge
Thanks - it needed someone else to give an impartial view. It was so non-NPOV it was untrue! MarkyMarkD (talk) 22:05, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Electromotive force
As you would be aware by reading the talk page, electromotive force is undergoing some editorial changes. I do not find it appropriate that you would simply revert changes without comment and (in my opinion, of course) absolutely no bona fides as knowing what you are talking about. Brews ohare (talk) 16:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Speed of light
Your presence on the above page would be most welcome. Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Your help is still needed. Martin Hogbin (talk) 22:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

The only way forward that I see on this page is a RfC on Brews ohare. This needs two editors to initiate. Will you help please. Martin Hogbin (talk) 20:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Speed of light
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Speed of light/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Speed of light/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Hers fold  (t/a/c) 04:01, 9 September 2009 (UTC)