User talk:Lambiam/Archive 20

Deng
It doesn't go by when they married. This issue was discussed before. Look at Michelle Malkin and Sarah Palin. As her legal surname is Murdoch, I will change it back. ★ Dasani ★ 20:39, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Descriptive statistics is....
I've moved descriptive statistics back to its proper title. "Statistics" is a singular noun when used in the sense in which is used here. I.e. one says "Statistics is..." not "Statistics are...." It is true that a different sense of the word exists, in which "statistic" is a singular noun whose plural is "statistics", but that is (obviously, I would have thought) not the sense in which the word is used here. It's as if "mathematics" were moved to "mathematic" on the theory that "mathematics" is the plural of "mathematic". Michael Hardy (talk) 04:34, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal of Solidus (punctuation)

 * I closed the proposal with the decision to merge it, since it was open for a year. Any ideas on how Solidus should be merged into Slash while still keeping it organised? Gsingh (talk) 17:45, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Marmara logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Marmara logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed amendment of section of JCN page, an invitation for input.
Hello. Thank you for your input regarding "notoriously unreliable" personal recounts of events used as references in Wikipedia pages. I have opened a discussion relative to a proposed amendment of the Death section of the Jocelyne Couture-Nowak page. You are more than welcome to provide feedback. just (talk) 01:13, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Ain Soph closure
Thanks for doing that. I wondered why Ron relisted it after my withdrawal statement. Probably he just didn't notice.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:31, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Copyedits
Hello Lambiam, thanks for cleaning up the Signpost's interview. I just wanted to say don't go to too much trouble; what's there currently is little more than scribblings in the back of a refil pad – a long way from copyedit-worthy! Regards,  Skomorokh   22:45, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Willem van IJperen
In light of your edit summary here please read WP:BLP. We cannot have unsourced contentious material in articles about living people, even if the subject is depicted positively. Hut 8.5 11:27, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It wasn't "explicitly attributed" to a source, which is what BLP requires. Hut 8.5 12:09, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Awards study in the Signpost
Hi Lambiam, you're right that this study is a perfect subject for the Signpost's "recent research" section (doubling as the Wikimedia Research Newsletter). Would you be interested in contributing a summary or review of the paper? (Usually around two paragraphs, should contain a clear description of methodology and results, sign up here.)

The research report only comes out once a month though, the next issue is planned for April 30. If someone would like to write a less academic note about the study for the "In the News" section, that would be fine too, and not preclude the later coverage in the research newsletter. On the other hand, it seems that there will be no "In the News" section this week at all due to lack of contributors, so that option is moot for now.

Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 22:00, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for signing up to do this review! The draft page is now at Wikipedia Signpost/2012-04-30/Recent research. Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 18:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks great, thanks again! Daniel Mietchen added an illustration, and the text may see some copyediting in the next hours, but otherwise it is good to go. Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 15:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry
Saw your comment. Sorry that I misrepresented your position as noncommital. It was a pretty desperate argumentative tactic to say that everything's against my position when it wasn't, so I was doing a very quick read through to tally the yes/maybe/no's. I missed where you had committed to a side. Cheers. &tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 13:24, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Mf Global
Dear Lambiam, You left a question about the timeline of MF Global's demise at the Talk Page associated with that article. A timeline is available here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janet-tavakoli/mf-global-jpmorgan-produc_b_1401059.html

More work could be done on the Missing Funds and Investigation section of that article if you have any interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.23.191.206 (talk) 05:42, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 04:44, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Account activation codes have been emailed.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
 * The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Pe vandalism
Thanks for your awesome work in tracking this. -Stevertigo (t | c) 21:46, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * My thanks as well and my apologies for not noticing that you wanted the term "Clean" used over "Done" - I should have read things more closely before I got going. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 00:37, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Planck time
I am sincerely thanking you for your edits.

Just wanted to say thanks, my friend.

--FormerNukeSubmariner (talk) 22:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

New sources for Useful Work Growth Theory
Lambiam:

You indicated that you would vote to keep this article if I could provide independent, reliable sources.


 * The article was published in the International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook (2004)
 * Ayres and Warr were cited by the International Monetary Fund's World Economic Outlook (2011), who adopted their methodology to prepare their forecast.

The article was renamed Ayres-Warr model and shows up much better in a Google search. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phmoreno (talk • contribs) 00:15, June 4, 2012‎ (UTC)


 * Thank you for checking the reference in detail. I would have looked it it more closely myself but I have had the flu.  And besides, I am getting tired of defending it.  Having followed peak oil theory (I'm an investor and read all of this years ago, much to my financial betterment) I've come in contact with Ayres-Warr several times, so I very familiar with it.  I also research productivity, and though I don't exactly agree with what Ayres and Warr are saying, when I read the papers I was able to better understand the productivity slowdown.  Therefore, I think if the article is deleted, Wikipedia have done the reader community a much greater disservice than a service by trying to establish "notability", etc.  I also believe the criteria for this article is far above what I have seen for lost of other questionable articles out there.  I've taught myself a lot by doing the reading  to write articles here, and my wife keeps telling me that I should be selling my work instead of giving it away, especially when I see something I've written here show up in financial newsletters.  Perhaps she is right Ind I should move on.Phmoreno (talk) 02:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I should also mention that I consider production functions to be physics envy and over simplistic. The fact that Ayres-Warr managed to get good fit was impressive, but the ah ha moment was when I saw the time series of electricity conversion efficiency.  Amazingly, it looked almost like the time series of the hourly wage of a non-supervisory production worker.  I realized that they had hit on something.Phmoreno (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Leonardo
I don't know what you were doing with those widths, but it was a total stuff-up! I ask seriously: Are you a vandal? Or have I merely stumbled on bonafide improvements before they are complete? If the latter is the case, then you need to put out an "inuse" banner while you are doing the improvements. And don't leave the page until you have checked that they actually worked. Amandajm (talk) 23:41, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * It was ghastly! Different columns were different widths in different sections!   It really looked, on my browser, as if someone had deliberately messed with it.  I'm so sorry it didn't work out!
 * It sounds to me as if what you intended to achieve, having the attributions given an expanding width, would be ideal.
 * Why don't you put up the banner, and try again?
 * I'll be on line for a while as I'm jiggling with the Royal Thames pageant. Boats just happens to be another passion.....
 * Amandajm (talk) 00:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * OK! I'll have a look at it, a bit later and see if I can implement your suggestion. :-) Amandajm (talk) 00:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for En vänlig grönskas rika dräkt
Yngvadottir (talk) 08:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Lambian, thank you so much for doing the DYK for En vänlig grönskas rika dräkt - what a lovely surprise! I had considered it but decided against for the same reason as you during the AfD - kind of hubristic, huh? - but delighted it's happened. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The Alwattan name
Hi Lambiam, I agree with you that Arabic transliterations need to be done in as consistent of a manner as possible. Still, were you aware that the Alwattan party itself spells its name is "Alwattan" on its own website? BTW, in case you might have any further comments on this question, I've started a discussion on the Alwattan Party's talk page about the party's name spelling. Thanks, Scott Scott P. (talk) 00:22, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * And thanks for your note of thanks :-) I've been dealing with Pe for a few years now. I wish we could thank all of the editors who reverted his nonsense at the time! Their work made our job easier. Cheers and have a great weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 00:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)