User talk:Homer Landskirty/Archive 1

Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937
Hey! Thanks for your concern on my rating of the article on Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937. First off, let me state that importance ratings mean pretty much nothing (and are almost 100% subjective). There are VERY VERY few articles i give a top importance, and 90% of all articles i give a low rating. Also, to get a rating above a B, it has to be really really good. That being said, you say there is only one reference. Are there not any media references? (media coverage, a news story, something else like that) that could be cited? If there is not, that would probably reinforce my rating of mid importance. How important is it overall to the global concept of aircraft? (keep in mind, I may have rated it higher if it was part of a different project.) Hope this helped explain my ratings. If there is anything else you are concerned about or would like to diescuss, please let me know on my talk page. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Might I also reccomend using named refs for citations in the article. That way, you can use a citation multiple times and have it only show once in the refernces section.  If you need help with this, I would be more than glad to help ya. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. No prob... I dont see a reason for ref's, but if we do some, then they should be named... --Homer Landskirty 16:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. --Homer Landskirty 16:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Is the section on the Nielsen murder in the reports or is that from other sources? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I dont care so much for that section, since it is not so closely related to that accident itself. But I understand, that this murder can be seen as a social/juristical aspect of the accident. I added a reference to a web page of SkyGuide (a private company that employed Nielsen and that was effectively (not necessarily juristically) responsible at that time). --Homer Landskirty 17:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope you do not take offense, i am going through a citing several of the sections with the information I can find. When I first started here, i wrote my first article without any citations.  I have slowly began to get used to them and now, the first thing i look at when i see an article is citations.  If there are none, i rarley rely on teh article because it could be uncredible.  (while articles with citations can still be uncredible), at least the soruces can be checked.  There are several sections in this article that did not come from the orginial report (at least it appears that way). I am just taking my time, reading up on it and adding appropriate citations.  Thanks again for bringing this to my attention! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No - its ok for me... --Homer Landskirty 19:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * you would not happen to have citations for the following conent would ya? I am having trouble finding it. "Campioni was supposed to fly the next leg of the journey as handling pilot." and "Many believe that this accident could have been avoided if the proper lessons had been taken from a near-miss which occurred about a year before the Bashkirian-DHL collision". That would be very helpful in enhancing this article? I have also tagged these sentences within the article with the Fact template.  -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 17:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm... I think, the co-pilot was flying, while the pilot (PIC?) was doing the radio... See page 7 of the official BFU report... How they spread their tasks, if they would have been able to continue their flight past 21:35:32, is not so interesting (most likely some reporter sucked that info out of his fingers...)... --Homer Landskirty 19:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That "near miss" might be this incident near or over Japan (maybe we should do an article about that, too?), where they had some injuries and a similar situation (all flight deck crews decided to ignore the ATCO and to obey the TCAS). Then there was a change proposal CP112 for TCAS (it contained something about a reversal RA in case of missing success after the (original) RA has been executed; page 35 of that BFU report). --Homer Landskirty 19:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Lisa Nowak
Thanks for your input about Lisa Nowak! Please keep in mind, whilst your thoughts about NASA may be interesting to some, your personal speculations are original research. The article may only include documented, verifiable accounts and interpretations from reliable, published secondary sources and the talk page is meant for discussing those and how to integrate them into a helpful article. Personal thoughts briefly thrown in to accompany these citations are ok for context but otherwise have no place on the talk page. Meanwhile, welcome to Wikipedia! Gwen Gale 19:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Homer, with all due respect, I have deleted the stalking thread you started as nonsense. Unless you can cite a reliable secondary source, it is not an acceptable topic for the talk page. If you would like to discuss it here, however, that's ok. I'll watch this page and will be happy to respond. Thanks for your understanding. Gwen Gale 19:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Oke doke... :-) I still think, that the information in the article is contradictious, what was the reason for beginning that "stalking thread"... The contradiction is: If there really was stalking activity since weeks, then it is very unlikely that this pepper spray assault happened, because the paths between Air force and NASA/Navy and even Army cannot be so long... And if Shipman liked it so much, that she did not complain, why doesnt she like the pepperspray, too? <-- That was a little too provoking possibly... --Homer Landskirty 19:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The pith here is... I don't think many would agree with your logic. Shipman mentioned the stalking on her request for a restraining order and she didn't say she liked it. You're right about one thing though, your conflations of the facts into these speculations are provocative, wholly unsupported and potentially disruptive, so I think it would be so helpful if you'd keep your comments about this here on your talk page :) Gwen Gale 19:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, it looks like, not many would agree with my logic... Now I wonder, when she was aware of the stalking the first time, and what she did to stop it, and why it didnt work. But I can live with that uncertainity... :-) Maybe in some months we can complete the article, when the missing information is published... --Homer Landskirty 19:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

thread completed. [please remove this line, if u want to continue it in spite of this line] --Homer Landskirty 19:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937
I notice you have twice altered the spelling from Commonwealth English to American English. In accordance with WP:ENGVAR this is prohibited. Thanks for your well-meaning effort, but I have undone your change, while keeping a useful distinction you made. Best wishes, --Guinnog 18:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Okidoke... I think, this is, because F.Rep.GERM is in the EU (so british spelling)? --Homer Landskirty 19:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, that logic works for me. What matters most is not to change from one version to another, except where the subject of the article is unambiguously American, British, Australian etc. I added the link you suggested. Thank you for your help in making the article a little better. --Guinnog 19:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok... I installed the british spelling dictionary for my browser and found some further spelling errors... Cross-check, please. --Homer Landskirty 19:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * If you are interested in doing typo corrections, there is always work needing to be done at WP:TYPO. What part of Germany are you from? --Guinnog 20:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I was born/raised in/near Kiel (northern GERM), currently I live near Hamburg (northern GERM) and I was resident of several cities in GERM (Munich (southern GERM), Berlin (eastern GERM), Essen (western GERM)). --Homer Landskirty 20:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I love Hamburg, Berlin, Munchen and Tubingen. I have had many good times in these places. Welcome, and good work. --Guinnog 21:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thx. --Homer Landskirty 21:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937
Hiya. Just wanted to thank you for your edits to this article. For once, it seems the wikitags functioned in the manner for which they were designed. I was worried for a brief moment that someone had gone back and simply reverted the edits I made, inserting the weasel and who tag - but lo and behold, it was a dedicated editor! So, thank you, and good job. --Action Jackson IV 18:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thx. :-) --Homer Landskirty 19:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI
You may want to check back at the article, Scientology and democracy, and add some more sourced citations. Smee 15:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC).


 * Yup - I just saw it and commented on ur "hangon"-intervention... I have that article on my watch list... I hope my reply is not obstructive or inconceivable... --Homer Landskirty 15:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope. Smee 15:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

Hi
See, I have a fast computer. lol :) - Jeeny Talk 16:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * :-) --Homer Landskirty 16:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Moving this here because now MY talk page is acting FUNNY
What's up with that? Are YOU using "special" coding? - Jeeny Talk 16:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Never not! :-) Ur 'puter has a virus... --Homer Landskirty 16:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Good. But, I certainly don't have a virus. It's the template while using IE. It's only the template. I've had other templates do the same though, but it is in the template, not a virus... And because I use sh'tty MS IE. I have all my "stuff" on here, and do not have the patience to move it all to Firefox, right now. Nor should one expect me or others to do the same, because of your feelings about MS. :) - Jeeny Talk 17:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * And I stick to my opinion, that u have some kind of computer virus (malicious code) on ur box... Furthermore u spread ur selfmade problems everywhere (e. g. on my talk page)... :-)) --Homer Landskirty 17:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I do NOT have a virus. well the only "virus" I have is Microsoft, as that can be concidered malicious code, I guess. And, what "selfmade problems" am I spreading? - Jeeny Talk 17:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This for example... --Homer Landskirty 17:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Should I change the title? I reacted inappropriately by wording the heading and comment in such a way. I didn't believe you were using "special" coding to hurt anything. Sorry. - Jeeny Talk 17:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * :-) I dont care... :-) --Homer Landskirty 18:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

template kennedyfamilytree
In so far u claim, that u have a problem with Quality of service (QoS) (speed-related) when u use, I am quite sorry, that ur browser does not behave so good; but i wish to tell u hereby that this template is quite interesting and surely not faulty (because my four (4) years old box can display and scroll it nicely). Thx. --Homer Landskirty 09:57, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I may advise u, that u might want to use Mozilla Firefox? --Homer Landskirty 09:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I have another idea: If u still feel like that template should not be used anymore, then u could just change the template itself (e. g. by commenting out the tree)... (template:kennedyfamilytree) --Homer Landskirty 11:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I personally think the family tree template is very interesting. My concern is not only with my choice of browser, but others too. Wikipedia should be accessed by anyone. Especially those who have little money to afford faster computers, etc. If I have a problem on my fast, cable connection then I know others with a slower connection will have it worse, and may not even be able to access the articles with that template. Also, Wikipedia does not specify a type of browser to use, and should not expect others to change their browser just for Wikipedia. Even though the Mozilla browser doesn't seem to have the same problems with this template as does IE, one should not be made to use one over another of their choice. But, that is not the issue. All browsers should be able to display the pages without becoming "high jacked", (as I call it). I do not know how to make templates or I would try to "fix" it. Is there another way to use it, such as a graphic? Thanks. - Jeeny Talk 15:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I just have a 1mbit/sec inet connection and an Athlon XP 2400+, which is quite old... And I have no problems... I feel quite bad, when I read, that wikipedia should adapt to some crazy implementations (like Microsoft's IE)... As long as this template does not contain malicious code, that hinders IE to behave like a good web browser, we shouldnt change anything... We r not here to help Microsoft to come through with every sh*t human beeings could produce and sell... --Homer Landskirty 16:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm... An image would be surely possible, but it would not allow hyper-refs (i.e. u couldnt click a name in that image)... --Homer Landskirty 16:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I understand what you're saying about Microsoft, but that is not the point. It is the choice of others. Even if you think Microsoft is "sh*t" others may not, and there is much proof people do not, because Microsoft is so successful! lol. (I prefer a Mac myself) We do not dictate to others what software, browser, etc to anyone. That is not what Wikipedia is about. Maybe it doesn't happen on slower computers using a browser other than IE, but again, that is not the issue. Anyone and everyone, using whatever they choose, should be able to view the pages on Wikipedia without frustrating them, by having their browser hang, or mouse go crazy. There is a reason Wikipedia suggests that pages be kept to a certain size, and that is so anyone from any computer, device, software and browser, can easily access the articles. Thanks for responding. :) - Jeeny Talk 16:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hm... I just repeat, that it is not Wikipedia's task to work around bugs in certain browsers... Maybe u forgot to install some service pack??? Or to update ur browser? At least I dont see, why I shouldnt be able to see that tree, just because MS's IE doesnt like to present it in an acceptable way... U sound like somebody who complains, that his Z3 or his slide rule is unable to present that page fast enough... So I would strenuously recommend, that u update ur obviously misinstalled box and stop ur DoS... :-) --Homer Landskirty 16:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I think you are misunderstanding the point I'm trying to present. My computer is updated and has all the service packs. I "complain" because I am concerned and sensitive to others that may not be as fortunate, and that so they have access to Wikipedia, no matter what hardware, software, etc they have and use. I don't understand why you accuse me of using DoS as I do not know how, and would not want to know how, as that would be malicious, and would never consider such a thing. :) - Jeeny Talk 16:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * because u removed the template from many articles, which is unnecessary and too much work... If u think, that template is a threat (which it isnt), u should change the template itself and not the pages, that use it... Maybe u can find help here: WP:Questions or Help:Contents or so? --Homer Landskirty 16:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. I'll think of something. I don't know what, though. But will think about it more, and comment or act later when I have time to devote to this. As of now, though, those templates really are not necessary to the articles. Even though they are interesting and can add interest to many articles. Right now, it's best to leave them out. Oh, and I'll take your advice about commenting them out instead of removing them completely ... until something changes. Thanks. - Jeeny Talk 17:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I do not believe the template is a "threat" but that it is frustrating to access the pages that have it. Not that its doing something to my computer. It's frustrating not to have control of the browser, and/or the mouse. I can only imagine when someone has less "sophisticated" equipment and software, and tries to access the article. They would miss a lot of education. Understand? Thanks - Jeeny Talk 17:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * not a word... u just keep repeating strange bug reports, that u should direct to ur computer/OS vendor but not to wikipedia(ans)... Cheers... --Homer Landskirty 17:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry I'm not making myself clear. There IS a bug in the template, one that affects IE specifically. LOTS of people use IE. That's the point. Not my computer. The template should work on all browsers, OS, and computers! Cheers. - Jeeny Talk 17:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * There is no IE specific code in the template... BYE! ;-) --Homer Landskirty 17:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

This template has been nominated for deletion. Please see Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 4 if you'd like to comment. Mike Dillon 15:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yup. I just saw it... And I will... :) --Homer Landskirty 15:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Bashkirian Airlines Flight 2937
Thanks for your message. I believe you are right on this as a policy issue but in my opinion it isn't worth edit-warring over. Anyway, I think I've solved the problem now. --John 01:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Good idea... Thx. --Homer Landskirty 07:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Map
I think it's a good idea to only use one image but does that image have to be b*tt ugly? Seriously, isn't there a better image available? Besides, I think it's better to show the city's location in Europe. --Krm500 12:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * U r right somehow... I think it is the unusual projection... We could use that CIA World Fact Book image, if we would know the coordinates... :-)) Position in europe like this: Image:Location Sweden EU Europe.png? --Homer Landskirty 14:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Would u like this one better: Image:Sweden-locator.png? --Homer Landskirty 14:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Now I know, why the map, that is used by the template, looks to different... It is indeed the projection (equi rectangular, so that we can just think that every pixel has the same amount of fractions of a degree, which is quite useful, because we r so near at a pole)... --Homer Landskirty
 * Sorry if I came on a bit aggressive. But I don't like the map since it has a weird projection and is limited to Sweden. Major cities should, imo, be shown where in Europe or Scandinavia they are. I agree that it's much better to use one image for all articles but this one is not the right one. --Krm500 22:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * OK... Could u tolerate the projection, if the map would show a bigger part of europe and some big cities? How big should the map be? --Homer Landskirty 08:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Germany Invitation
--Zeitgespenst (talk) 00:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Ryke Geerd Hamer
Scientology entry in "see also" section indeed had got dropped, sorry it was not intentional and I can only assume I lost it in a cut&paste when reordering the sections about. Indeed seems a reasonable "see also" extension :-) David Ruben Talk 19:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * no prob... thx... --Homer Landskirty (talk) 09:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Third Opinion
Hi Homer, I saw the dispute posting regarding the Bashkirian Airlines crash on Third Opinion. I have posted my opinion on the [|article's talk page]. I noticed that you and Averell were both extremely civil and I wanted to take the time to commend you on that point. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 16:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Metallized polyethylene terephthalate
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Metallized polyethylene terephthalate, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 212.41.108.161 (talk) 19:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * k --Homer Landskirty (talk) 20:58, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

edits in smoke detector
hey! what was the exact reason for this (changing CO2 to CO)? CO comes later (when combustion gets incomplete)... CO2 is there from the start and spreads fast due to convection... bye --Homer Landskirty (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * AFAIK (but IANAE), the smoke-detector manufacturers don't sell CO2 detectors, named as such (I did a search at the time, and wasn't able to find any), but a number of them do sell CO detectors, or smoke/CO detector combos. Also, CO2 is not so much toxic by itself, as the lack of oxigen --or in combination with the CO produced by a fire-- is toxic.  CO2, although not particularly helpful while still in the blood stream, is not toxic in the way CO is.  CO "wants" to become CO2, so two CO molecules can split an O2 molecule in the blood stream, to form two not-so-useful CO2 molecules, thus depriving the body of oxygen.  Like I said, I'm not an expert, so I don't mind you editing back the info about CO2.BlueCerinthe (talk) 07:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Scientology and democracy
I have nominated Scientology and democracy, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Scientology and democracy. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Rob (talk) 02:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * go ahead... :-) byebye --Homer Landskirty (talk) 08:39, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Scientology and democracy
Is there any media coverage for this subject? The article seems to be mostly from primary sources. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * hm... from the german article (scientology)
 * Stuart A. Wright (2002): Public Agency Involvement in Government-Religious Movement Confrontations. S. 102–122 in: Cults, Religion, and Violence herausgegeben von David G. Bromley & J. Gordon Melton. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, S. 115.
 * Arnd Diringer: Scientology – Verbotsmöglichkeit einer verfassungsfeindlichen Bekenntnisgemeinschaft. Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main 2003, passim. (german)
 * (PDF)
 * --Homer Landskirty (talk) 00:39, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ich liebe meine Audi. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * this is in english: on page 50 (27) prof. kent writes: "The RPF and Human Rights Issues — Contrary to the judgements of some social scientists, the brainwashing term has validity in the discourse of politics and legal debates, in this case about human rights. Without question the RPFs’ operations violate a number of human rights statutes, which the United Nations proclaimed in both its 1948 resolution entitled The International Bill of Human Rights (United Nations, 1996b), and its 1996 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (United Nations, 1996a)." -- "guaranteed" human rights r an important property of a democratic country... --Homer Landskirty (talk) 08:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * They don't seem to be focused on Scientology and democracy in a substantive way. They are more about the politics of Scientology and the controversy surrounding the group. The argument at AfD for deletion is that these issues are already dealt with in the main article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * hm - ok... but why is there an article about "scn and psychiatry"? i still think, that scn is focused mainly on democracy, because: democracy supports things, that r bad according to scn (even if the british queen didnt like electro-shocks, she couldnt ban them -- not even in UK)... --Homer Landskirty (talk) 22:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That article looks like it needs a lot of work. But it does include sources like this one that deal specifically with the topic. I'm not sure exactly what you mean when you say Scientology is focused mainly on democracy. Are you suggesting it's a politcal organization as opposed to a religion? Regardless, the key to a good article is sources. Otherwise it's more of an essay or argument. The Queen of England and the President of the United States could campaign on health issues including prescription drug use in psychiatry they so chose to, and they would certainly be influential players in the policy debate whether for or against Scientology's positions. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * hm - AFAIK scn tries to change the society and therefore they work mostly the democratic systems (they accuse them of being nazis/insane and suggest enhancements)... when i heard of them in TV in 1992 the german gov and scn accused each other of being nazis, IIRC... --Homer Landskirty (talk) 07:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I agree with you that the subject would make a good article. But if it hasn't been covered substantially by reliable sources, we would be doing original research in creating such an article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Canavanine


Hi, thanks for adding this image to Canavanine. I have a little niggly request - could you add an E to arginin and canavinin? Thanks Smartse (talk) 17:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * giggle - yes, i saw that too late... in german and spanish the ending is different from the french and english ending... what should i do? maybe we should remove the names and refer to them as "upper" and "lower"? --Homer Landskirty (talk) 19:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * now i cut off some more letters and appended a dot ('.')... abbriviation seems to solve the multi-lang.-problem... :-) --Homer Landskirty (talk) 21:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Subject to Council Approval


The article Subject to Council Approval has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Orphaned, unreferenced, dictionary definition

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stephen 01:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

pt:Equação biquadrada and de:Biquadrat
I see your point, in that German article de:Biquadrat means the function x to x4, while Portuguese article pt:Equação biquadrada means the equation a x^4 + c x^2 + e = 0. But I don't think it's ok to interwiki to redirects, and certainly I don't think it's ok to make a fusion of Portuguese article pt:Equação biquadrada into pt:Equação do quarto grau - the latter is written in a much advanced context, and would scare teenagers who might be interested in the much simpler biquadratic equation.

BTW, ich verstehe Deutsch, aber ich kann nicht Deutsch schreiben: mein Wortschatz ist klein. Albmont (talk) 17:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * hey albmont! my problem with the article name is, that in pt:Equação biquadrada u call it "equação biquadrada", but in pt:Equação do quarto grau u call the same kind of equation "Equação biquadrática"... why is that? is it a misnomer? bye! --Homer Landskirty (talk) 17:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Both names are used in Portuguese. Most often, I read "equação biquadrada", but "equação biquadrática" is also correct. Also, a few words have "continental" differences, with one form used in Europe-Africa-Asia (Portugal, Angola, East Timor, etc) and another term used in America (Brazil). Albmont (talk) 03:28, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * ic - maybe u should mention that in both articles? is it possible that "equação biquadrática" and "Equação do quarto grau" r used synonymously? (i mean: both names can be used for the generic case?) --Homer Landskirty (talk) 07:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No, this is not possible in Portuguese. "Biquadrado" (and its variants) is used only in the context of a x^4 + c x^2 + e = 0. x^4 is "quarta potência" (fourth power). Albmont (talk) 15:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * oki doke :-) — then i just have one further question: why does pt:equação biquadrática redirect to pt:Equação do quarto grau but not to pt:Equação do quarto grau? --Homer Landskirty (talk) 16:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That's because pt:Equação biquadrática was the original article, written by an IP. Later, Salgueiro (a great contributor in math articles, that vanished two years ago) moved the article to pt:Equação do quarto grau and fixed the errors - but the redirect was forgotten. I am campaigning against IP editions in the Portuguese wikipedia: IPs do more harm than useful contributions, and what they mess up consumes a precious time to clean up, that could be used to improve the existing articles. Albmont (talk) 13:45, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * i c... --Homer Landskirty (talk) 13:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Omari Hardwick
Hello Homer Landskirty. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Omari Hardwick, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Try PROD or AfD instead. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:19, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * kk - i wrote some things there now... :-) --Homer Landskirty (talk) 10:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

And How Does That Make You Kill?
Yes it was. Almost none of the episodes of the CSI franchises have proven sufficiently notable. I'm finding short, unsourced articles with nothing but plot summaries and trivia. Per WP:EPISODE, such articles should be merged/redirected. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 19:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Isopropyl thioxanthone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dupont (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2013 (UTC)


 * fixed... :-) --Homer Landskirty (talk) 18:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Manjaro Userbox
Hallo Homer Landskirty, Ich habe eine Tür gemacht, die meiner Meinung nach viel besser aussieht als die Manjaro Linux Tür, die du benutzt, und Ich würde es schätzen, wenn Sie es verwenden! Die Userbox, die Sie gerade verwenden, sieht so aus:

Die Box, die ich gemacht habe, sieht so aus:

Ich hoffe, dir gefällt der, den ich gemacht habe! (Entschuldigung für das schlechte Deutsch)   17:21, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * hi! ok... ur logo really looks more like the official logo... why cant u just update the logo in Template:User OS:Manjaro? then i dont have to touch my user page... furthermore the path of the template looks easier and more straightforward... :) (PS: sorry if my english is bad... i can understand ur german quite easily...) thx. bye. --Homer Landskirty (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I decided to not replace it because I'd rather not change things people are already using. If there's enough interest in changing it, I'll move it in the future. (PS: your English is great! I'm glad you can understand my German.)   20:35, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * ok - ic... i had WP:Be bold in the back of my head... :) i updated my homepage now... i just saw, that i am the creator of that template... do u think, that i could update it myself? but then i had to use ur code... i would b ok with it, if u do it... :) --Homer Landskirty (talk) 21:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * i just did it... giggle... couldnt wait... *wags tail* :) --Homer Landskirty (talk) 21:19, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * no worries! I updated it with my code so it matches the original I created, good use of WP:Be bold!   22:16, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * *yay* :) --Homer Landskirty (talk) 05:27, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Smart Cache for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Smart Cache is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Smart Cache until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. 99Electrons (talk) 03:42, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

WP:BLP
Please remember WP:BLP which applies to all pages on wikipedia. I'm not sure if I correctly understand what you are trying to say here [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science&diff=886452060&oldid=886451905], but you seem to be accusing someone called Robin of deliberate wrong doing without the support of reliable secondary sources so I've removed it. I'm not certain who Robin refers to here, but if you are accusing the prosecutor of deliberate wrong doing, as I'm assuming they are still alive and especially as you've provided no sources this is a serious BLP violation which could lead to a block if repeated. If you wish to post your message again, please reformulate it to exclude any BLP violations. Nil Einne (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2019 (UTC)


 * ? wrongdoing? that means here nothing more than "that he made a mistake"... it is horrible for to see, that nobody seems to mention it... --Homer Landskirty (talk) 10:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Follow-Up
I will try to explain about a few related matters. I will welcome any comments by User:Cullen328, and will try to answer any questions that you have. First, I will try to explain about Wikipedia. The purpose of Wikipedia is to maintain a high-quality on-line encyclopedia that anyone can read and that almost anyone can edit. The primary purpose of Wikipedia is to provide and maintain the encyclopedia for its readers. Any other function or service that Wikipedia provides is secondary, or tertiary or quaternary, to that primary purpose. As a result, any criticism that Wikipedia is failing to provide a secondary or tertiary function or service is just that, a side criticism.

You stated a complaint that I did not answer your question at Third Opinion, because I said that there had already been more than two editors involved in a Reference Desk discussion, and you evidently thought that I should have reviewed the exchange in enough detail to determine that the other participants did not count as editors. I will try to explain about the Reference Desks and about Third Opinion, which is a Dispute Resolution service.

The Reference Desks are a secondary service of Wikipedia, not its primary mission, and the Reference Desks are a controversial secondary service. There was a recent Request for Comments to close the Reference Desks. While it failed, and the Reference Desks were kept, there was substantial support for closing the Reference Desks, because they are subject to frequent trolling, frequent disruptions, and frequent complaints that questions are not answered, answered incorrectly, or not answered effectively. We know that the Reference Desks have problems, including trolls.

Also, Dispute Resolution including Third Opinion is a secondary service, and is intended to support the primary function of maintaining the encyclopedia. The Third Opinion is intended to be a place where two editors who have a small content dispute about an article can go and ask a third editor for an opinion. It is primarily intended to resolve small content disputes about encyclopedia articles, in support of the primary function of providing those articles for viewers. Your question was not about an encyclopedia article, because it was about answers at the Reference Desk, and more than two editors had already replied to it. I thought of closing out your question as not being about an article, but the guidelines for Third Opinion do not explicitly say that questions must be about articles, so I closed it out as having already had multiple editors comment. Perhaps User:TransporterMan, who is the coordinator for Third Opinion and some other dispute resolution services, will comment further. Perhaps I should have said that we do not intervene in disputes at the Reference Desk, but I cannot recall a previous inquiry at Third Opinion that was about a Reference Desk discussion.

So your concern about your question was tertiary to the mission of Wikipedia. Unfortunately, we didn’t help you (and you didn’t help us to maintain the encyclopedia).

I will add to the request by User:Cullen328 that you type in standard written English. Many of the editors of the English Wikipedia use English as a second language, and may not be familiar with the abbreviations of some other on-line communities. It is easy enough for a literate Briton, American, or other Anglophone to remember to use the standard written language that they learned in grade school and in high school, easier than for an educated Indian or European to try to use a code that is not the standard written English that they learned in high school. To a Briton or an American, your usage simply looks informal and sloppy – and Wikipedia is a formal effort, not an informal one. To a European or an Indian, your usage may be cryptic and confusing.

To address your ending comments and questions to Cullen, yes, I believe that this is what Wikipedia wants, because what we want to do is to maintain and improve an encyclopedia that is written in standard written English, and using standard written English to discuss it is reasonable. If there are words in an article that neither a reader nor a jurist will understand, please call them to our attention and we will try to improve them. You write: “i wonder if that is really what WP wants”. I wonder whether contributing to Wikipedia is really what you want. If not, you are not required to help us. If so, please try to understand that this is how we communicate. You write: “is there something like a WP-court-house or so?”  Yes. There is the Arbitration Committee, but it resolves otherwise intractable disputes that impair the primary mission of improving the encyclopedia. If you want to help us maintain Wikipedia, you may want to read more about our policies and guidelines. I do not see any dispute here that is likely to require arbitration.

I think that this should clarify what the primary mission of Wikipedia is and why we did not parse the question about a Reference Desk discussion in more detail. User:Cullen328 and User:TransporterMan are welcome to add to that.

Robert McClenon (talk) 22:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I already made the two points that I wanted to make on your talk page, . I agree with everything you have written here about this matter. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:33, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Afterthoughts
I have read the Science Reference Desk discussion in detail and have looked at the article in question. I see that you, User:Homer Landskirty, have a dispute about an article, Germanwings Flight 9525, and that your issue has to do with what language should and should not be used with regard to the state of mind, legal competence, or legal presumptions about the state of mind of Andreas Lubitz, who evidently intentionally destroyed the aircraft with all its passengers and crew on board. The underlying issue is an article content issue concerning an article, Germanwings Flight 9525, that is seen by the public. You did begin to discuss that issue in the proper place, the article talk page, Talk:Germanwings Flight 9525, and it was discussed there by User:Nil Einne. You then asked about the meanings of intent, deliberation, and psychosis at the Reference Desk. Your question was addressed seriously by User:Nil Einne, User:Jayron32, User:Martinevans123, and User:Nimur. You then asked for a Third Opinion at the Third Opinion desk. On re-reading the context, I was entirely correct in removing your question, because it had already been addressed by more than two editors, and they did address your question seriously, and you cannot reasonably say that they behaved as trolls or as “non-editors”. It is true that there were references in passing to a mythical place, Xanadu, or a mythical villain, Xenu; sometimes myths can be illustrative. I do not see a reference to rabies. A cat was mentioned in passing, hypothetically, as an example of a semi-intelligent being.

You did have a valid article content issue. I think that it has been reasonably addressed. If you think that it needs to be addressed further, it can be addressed at the article talk page, Talk:Germanwings Flight 9525. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I've not read every word at the article talk page or at the Science Reference Desk, but I've read enough to get the gist. And what I have read suggests to me that this is a reasonable characterization of what has happened and that Robert's removal of the Third Opinion request was entirely proper. Let me note in passing that I join in the chorus suggesting that Homer Landskirty would do himself a considerable favor by writing in plain, standard English without abbreviations of common English words. Regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 23:04, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

???
--Homer Landskirty (talk) 05:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) in re "rabies": ...
 * 2) so u all believe, that "Xenu might explain everything"...
 * 3) and that "a severe psychotic disorder, that requires  hospitalization, allows deliberation and intent", but u do not want to say that too clearly in the article, so that u mention that in paragraphs, that r far away from each other...
 * 4) then u even say, that a cat's behavior cannot be explained with a stimulus–response model, + that a cat has a choice...
 * 5) furthermore u talk a lot about the reference desk, which is obviously orphaned... at least in the "Science" area i found no single reply, that shows knowledge about psychology... just cats&xanadu and weird apologetics in favor of the weird report...
 * 6) that is clearly sabotage of WP... at least in that article... i dont know how to fix it (that arbitration thingy is most likely broken, too...)... so i ll just wait that it gets better...
 * 7) in the meantime: stop filling my talk page, pls...

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Sandbox/user:w00t


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Wikipedia:Sandbox/user:w00t, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:39, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)