User talk:Iainscott

This page maybe refactored to clarify conversations, or archived, as and when I feel like it. I will useually reply on your talk page.

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Here are some links I find useful


 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Neutral point of view
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~.

Cheers, Sam [Spade] 14:30, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Re The Beiderbecke Affair, if it is really talking about cubs (and although I loved all three series I sadly don't remember it in such detail) then there needs to be a reference to 'cubs' prior to the use that is there at the moment explaining what they are; just a sentence really. --[[User:VampWillow|VampWillow]] 10:13, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Re William Hague - done. Although to my untrained eye, the anon's additions didn't seem that bad, probably a selection of quotes and such are worth keeping - but I don't want to know about British politics that badly, I just like the nicknames :-). Too bad the American press is too cowardly to do the same for ours... Stan 18:01, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * OK, my only change was to expand the Fighting Foetus bit to "He also became known as the 'Fighting Foetus', having been likened to a foetus by Tony Banks, the Minister for Sport, owing to his unfortunate likeness to an unborn baby, and later extended by the Guardian's Parliamentary sketchwriter, Simon Hoggart to 'Fighting Foetus' due to his bantam-like aggressive demeanour at a political rally." Just put the article into the state you want, and add this one run-on sentence. Stan 18:27, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for tagging those offensive redirects with speedy delete tags! That was very helpful. They are all deleted now. Andris 14:28, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

Cold Fusion
Iain,

I see you corrected my "correction". To my understanding, only a deuterium-tritium reaction produces the small amount of radioactive byproducts you mentioned in the article; this is a result of the extra neutron released in the reaction striking the reactor vessel and creating new isotopes (the phrase "slow neutron capture" keeps coming back to me, but it has been years since my modern physics class). A deuterium-deuterium reaction should be "clean" as there is no other byproduct other than hydrogen. If I am incorrect in this, I am sorry for the inconvenience.

Regards, Kenton

Hello Iain,

I got some advice for another user (Bjoern) who has a Ph.D in physics. He did some research and it turns out there is no way around the creation of excess neutrons. These neutrons would create radioactive isotopes when they interact with the walls of the reaction vessel. I'm a little disappointed that fusion isn't as clean as I had thought; there doesn't seem to be any way around the production of radioactive waste (Unless there is some way of containing or controlling the excess neutrons, which would be difficult to say the least.) Perhaps the reactor containment could be constructed of a material that produces waste of a very short half life when it absorbs neutrons. This would help to make the situation manageable. I'm digressing.

Thanks again for your input. It looks like my optimistic edit was premature and the page will remain as written.

Thanks, kenton 17:14, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

KGB article
lainscott,

I believe you are mistaken on your edit to the KGB page where you said that I vandalized it. If you do some diffs I think you will agree that the culprit was an IP address. My change was a small one to fix a link. I would very much appreciate a retraction of that statement on that history page. Spalding 21:40, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying that on my talk page, lainscott, that you removed the vandalism by others by reverting to my last edit. It's funny how easy it can be to misinterpret the intention of an English sentence sometimes.  In fact, that's a great idea for an article, the order of words in sentences! Regards,  Spalding 11:26, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Wikidebate
Hi there. I did, or am about to do, as you have suggested about the wikidebate page. Just out of interest, how did you stumble across the wikidebate page? It made me feel important that someone noticed it and commented on it. And you're from Cardiff - I'm from Cardiff too (kinda). A French student there.

The Humungous Image Tagging Project
Hi. You've helped with the WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Another problematic article on immigration
I noticed your work on Illegal immigrant. It seems like you have an eye for identifying POV statements and other problems in this subject area, which is why I would like to bring Islam in Italy to your attention. I recently listed it for Cleanup for various reasons, added some comments on the Talk page, and I have the intention of going over it myself when I have the time. However, before I go to work on something another user posted more or less "as is" it would feel good to hear someone else's thoughts on this. If, of course, you have the time and interest. / Alarm 11:29, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Category:UK Wikipedians
Hi, just to let you know that the list of UK participants at the UK notice board was getting rather long, so I have replaced it with the above category which I have added to your user page. -- Francs2000 | Talk 30 June 2005 19:35 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)