User talk:False vacuum/Archive 1

message from Hrafn
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability and the content has been removed. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I really don't see how you could prefer this article to this one for cyclic model. Perhaps you should (re)read both of them.  What do you find particularly dubious about any of the material you have repeatedly removed?  A cursory inspection suggests that it is all either well known to cosmologists or easily verified by reading a couple of papers on the arXiv.  I personally am not an expert on this subject, but I know enough physics to be competent to make such decisions, and I just attended a talk by Steinhardt in which he personally asserted some of the things you deleted (I came across the article in attempting to follow up on the talk in question). Also, I'd never heard of this Peter Lynds before, but his stuff doesn't seem to qualify as actual physical cosmology, and the existing citations do not support the assertion that cosmologists consider it relevant (if I remember right, they refer to his personal web page and some magazine article&mdash;or maybe it was a blog post). It would be good if this article is not left in its present, embarrassing state for any longer than can be avoided. I'll add some citations myself if I have to, but it might take a while. False vacuum (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

message from John Quiggin
Please don't do things like page moves on articles about which you are clearly not informed, such as Inflation. Stick to minor edits until you have a better understanding of the project. JQ (talk) 11:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Please don't write your comments indented under unrelated ones. As to the substance of your comment, I have no idea which "project" you're referring to, but I still think what I did was correct, namely: moving the financial inflation article to a page titled something other than simply "inflation" (specifically, whatever the economists prefer; I chose price inflation originally because there was a redirect to the article in question there, but I have no special expertise in that area) and replacing it with the disambiguation which points to all the things that are frequently called simply "inflation" (such as the one I'm currently attempting to study, cosmic inflation).  If you disagree, feel free to explain why.  If I'm missing your intended point, feel free to make it more clearly. False vacuum (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Inflation RM
You previously participated in a discussion at Talk:Inflation. The article has been moved again so, if you care to clarify of reiterate your position, please participate at Talk:Inflation (financial). —  AjaxSmack   00:00, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for adding the extra option to the list. —  AjaxSmack   00:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)