User talk:Jsd

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 16:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

source
Could you please put references to your sources on trireme. preferably as footnotes. Thx Wandalstouring 19:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I added a footnote as requested. It's just high-school physics. Jsd 03:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Not enough. If you have to calculate it in a physics exam, you need to show the whole calculation, so just act likewise AND DO SUCH THINGS ON THE DISCUSSION PAGE FIRST! Afterwards several other editors will look at your thoughts, correct errors and agree/disagree. afterwards insert such comments, otherwise you violate Wikipedia policy of no OR. I'm sorry, but in cases an editor does not agree with a recognized source, he needs to present very well sourced information. Wandalstouring 07:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Multiplying one number by another is not a "physics exam". Dividing one number by another is not "original research". Using information presented in the same article a few paragraphs earlier or a few paragraphs later (and not considered controversial) does not constitute "unsourced information". Jsd 15:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Just give me the the citation and THE ANCIENT AUTHOR you are refering to for your claim that he wrote totally wrong things. As long as you do not write clearly the formula you use it is not acceptable, our ordinary reader must be able to understand. Wandalstouring 16:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I think we have solved this issue now. If you are interested in contributing some physics to history articles I do appreciate this. for example bow and crossbow could have a better explanation of Compound bow vs D-shaped or recurve bows. As one can see from geometry, the accelaration of the sinew decreases for the traditional systems the more the bow relaxes, not so for compound. fom this you could explain why for short distances very heavy projectiles (arrows) were used (efficiency). Wandalstouring 16:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Significant figures
I like your added section. Very well done. One point: It is usually better not to contradict other parts of the article. Better to change what is wrong than to say "A is true" and later say "A is not true, B is true". But still, I think your addition was a vast improvement to the article. --Slashme 13:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Scientific method
Thank you for your edits on this article's talk page. I appreciate your adding your edits to the foot of the talk page, with a comment.

Additionally, common editing practice is to sign talk page edits with --~ where 4 tildes automatically sign your username with date stamp. As you may have noted, a bot did this for you, but it is a signal to the rest of the community that you know common practice when you sign.

I have no idea where that is coming from. I did sign my article with four tildes, as you can see from the name/date stamp near the bottom. I re-verified this just now by looking at my browser history. I have no idea why the bot decided to add a  second name/date stamp right after the first. I suspect the bot needs repair. Jsd 22:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Note that citations are required in order for your edits to survive in the article. But it is probably prudent to discuss your thoughts, as you have done, on the talk page, to signal your intention to other editors.

Expert contribution is always welcome. Before devoting a huge amount of effort putting preferences in place in the article, you ought to be aware that you may wish to invest your efforts in venues where original research is appreciated. On Wikipedia, such effort would be promptly reverted by policy. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 13:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Entropy reference
Please stop adding this reference - Misconceptions about Spreading - to articles on Entropy. It is not a reliable source and, as it seems to be written by you, you have a serious conflict of interest in adding this source. It is not clear who you. While that is fine on WP, it is not fine for a source. This source is essentially the same as your blog, advocating various points about entropy which may or may not be accepted by everyone in the field. Also many of your edits are not encyclopedic and are just advocacy for a point of view. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  23:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Good work on entropy page!
The entropy page was in bad shape, partially because of resistance by some to explain entropy in terms of information theory. So, it is good to see someone taking the time to rewrite the article. This is then bound to generate resistance, as the comment above by Bduke shows. Of course, you cannot use your own webpage as a source here on Wikipedia, but Bduke could have explained that to you in a different way.

Anyway, I think that the section "Entropy versus Heat and Temperature" should now be completely rewritten. The entropy has already been defined, so we need to define the temperature in terms of the derivative of S w.r.t. the internal energy and then we can talk about the definition of heat and work.

Count Iblis (talk) 00:00, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Euclidean vectors
Thanks for your helpful edits on the Euclidean vector. I have struggled to get other authors there to distinguish between basis sets and coordinate systems. Many people seem to think those are the same thing, and even worse, some people think they are also the same thing as a reference frame. Your statement that basis sets are often derived from coordinate systems is a good delineation of the two. MarcusMaximus (talk) 21:37, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Kirchhoff's laws
You'll want to weigh in on the discussion at Talk:Kirchhoff's circuit laws. Dicklyon (talk) 07:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Sinebot
Just thought you might appreciate an explanation of why sinebot is signing all your posts. It is because your signature does not include a link to you. That is how sinebot recognises a signature as being a signature. Providing a link in signatures is a requirement of the guidelines, see WP:SIGLINK.  Spinning Spark  11:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)