User talk:Robert Merkel/archive 4

Sale of the Century
Hi Robert. You should stop by the Sale page you created sometime to see how nicely it has evolved. Lambertman 17:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

AIDS in Africa
Hi Robert, thank you for asking me to cite the refereneces to Bangui, I also was surprised to discover that HIV testing is not widely available in Africa. If you read the 2002 report from South Africa, I think you will find that HIV antibodies could be detected in only 15-30% of Bangui defined AIDS in South Africa - so my "about half" was generous! Also this report identifies medical treatment as a major source of AIDS in South Africa - with 30-60% of clinics and hospital having NO sterilisation equipment!

Should we add the death of Nelson Mandela's son to this page? He died of liver failure after a year of ART following an AIDS diagnosis. Liver failure due to ART is now the leading case of AIDS death in "Western Countries" and the main reason for the 2004 guidleines to defer ART in healthy HIV positives.

Is seems paradoxical that some Africans are demanding treatments now discredited in the West. Remember the Neprivine fiasco with Archbishop Tutu?

Sci guy 03:08, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. I think there's still some points to be addressed with regards to this material (particularly whether the older stats match the situation in 2005); they can be sorted out on the relevant talk page. --Robert Merkel 06:24, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sorry - I'm the chap that edited the Osprey article, and I have an ID, but I did not use it. Somehow the system got your message to me, which is unsettling. I cannot reveal my source, an aerodynamicist who was moved to a totally different position because of his criticism of the Osprey project. The remarks should stand on their own - should be able to be checked in an engineering text, I should think. Just look at why a helicopter takes a while to take off - it must be to get the airstream going. Take a household electric fan in a casing and obstruct the intake. The blades speed up (same with a vacuum cleaner). That indicates the blades are only stirring air around them not propelling anything. Please reply here if at all, since my IP address will probably change from time to time.


 * If so, they should be rewritten to indicate that fact is, well, fact, rather than attributing to the aforementioned "experienced aerodynamicists". You still need to address the difficulties that this fact causes the V-22 design, though.  Please do so at the talk page of the Osprey article.  By the way, if anything you're more identifiable logged out than in because the IP address you've edited from is displayed publicly.  There's nothing stopping you creating an alternate pseudonymous identity for editing sensitive articles if you wish. --Robert Merkel 23:06, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Traumatic Masturbatory Syndrome

 * In the probably vain hope that the person who commented on the votes for deletion on the for Traumatic Masturbation Syndrome article will see this, if you do could you please drop me a message (either on my user page, the VfD discussion or by email) about how you found the paper that references the Sank article? --Robert Merkel 05:54, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I found it in PsychINFO which is now called WebSPIRS18.171.1.49 23:45, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vote on policy positions at Government of Australia
I note that Skyring has said that he doesn't intend submitting a proposal for the position this article should adopt on the matters in dispute between him and other uses. I think we can all draw the appropriate conclusions from this. At the expiry of the 24-hour period I gave Skyring yesterday to submit a proposal (10.10am AEST), I will announce a vote at Australian Wikipedians' notice board and at Village pump. Since Skyring has wimped the chance to have his views voted on, the vote will be a straight yes/no on my policy position, which appears below. Amendments or alternative suggestions are of course welcome. I have an open mind on how long the voting period should be and how many votes should be seen as an acceptable participation. I will be posting this notice to the Talk pages of various Users who have participated in this debate.

My proposed policy position is this:
 * That in Government of Australia, and in all other articles dealing with Australia's system of government, it should be stated that:
 * 1. Australia is a constitutional monarchy and a federal parliamentary democracy
 * 2. Australia's head of state is Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia
 * 3. Under the Constitution, almost all of the Queen's functions are delegated to and exercised by the Governor-General, as the Queen's representative.


 * That any edit which states that (a) Australia is a republic, (b) the Governor-General is Australia's head of state, or (c) Australia has more than one head of state, will be reverted, and that such reversions should not be subject to the three-reversions rule.
 * Edits which say that named and relevant persons (eg politicians, constitutional lawyers, judges) disagree with the above position, and which quote those persons at reasonable length, are acceptable, provided proper citation is provided and the three factual statements are not removed. Adam 23:17, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

creeping revisionism
Yes, the AIDS article continues to circle the drain. The problems with it now are similar to those it had in April: it's being continually subverted by overemphasizing the points of AIDS revisionists while discounting the otherwise nearly universally accepted understanding of AIDS pathology. In a specialized field like this, it's relatively easy for a determined zealot to keep the article in a state which favors his position, because there are so few people with both the knowledge to argue against his points and the patience to do so continually.(A similar situation exists at Traumatic Masturbatory Syndrome). So I'm afraid I've more or less written this one off, which is unfortunate: the article as it currently exists is not one of Wikipedia's high points. Similar attempts at subverting articles about HIV and AiDS tests were less "successful". - Nunh-huh 17:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh well, I've bitten the bullet on this one with a massive pre-crank revert; waiting for the fun and games to commence :) --Robert Merkel 07:14, 29 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Bon chance! - Nunh-huh 08:51, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism
Robert, the talk page of AIDS includes the 2005 US treatment guidelines, which make it very clear that treatments to delaying the onset of AIDS are controversial. This idea was popular ten years ago - but the clinical trials did not support the original optimism.

NPOV means present a balanced statement reflecting the current position - such as this one from 2002.


 * Antiretroviral regimens are complex, have serious side effects, pose difficulty with adherence, and carry serious potential consequences from the development of viral resistance because of nonadherence to the drug regimen or suboptimal levels of antiretroviral agents. Patient education and involvement in therapeutic decisions are critical. Treatment should usually be offered to all patients with symptoms ascribed to HIV infection. Recommendations for offering antiretroviral therapy among asymptomatic patients require analysis of real and potential risks and benefits. Panel on Clinical Practices for Treatment of HIV. September 2002

Fred2005 14:32, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Read that quote more carefully. Oh, and by the way, you might want to read Vandalism before throwing that term around here.  In the context of Wikipedia, that word does not mean what you think it means...--Robert Merkel 23:45, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

ITMA
I know you are probably fed up hearing about him but I've added in a detailed case against Skyring over his attempted harrassment of me at Requests for arbitration/Skyring/Evidence. Petaholmes has also added in stuff on the same issue. It might be worth a read. Slán. Fear ÉIREANN (talk) 00:25, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. I hope the ArbCom can reach a decision soon.  --Robert Merkel 01:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pacific Islands Forum article edit
Robert: I just saw your addition to the Pacific Islands Forum article - i.e.

"New Zealand and especially Australia are massively larger and wealthier than the other small, poor, and in some cases outright impoverished island nations that make up the rest of the forum. The two nations are the source of most of these countries' foriegn aid, and in Papua New Guinea (in Bouganville) and the Solomons have recently conducted peacekeeping/stabilization military operations."

No complaints about the basic sentiments expressed - just some of the basic facts. For example, New Zealand is not massively larger than Papua New Guinea, either in landmass area or population (in fact I think it is smaller in both), although it is certainly wealthier in terms of GDP per capita (although probably not in natural resources). Another is the statement that most of the Forum island countries foriegn aid comes from Australia and New Zealand, when I think the European Union is possibly the South Pacific's biggest donor and the USA the biggest donor in the North Pacific. (French aid is also substantial, although the UK has pulled out entirely).

--Timonroad 30 June 2005 00:33 (UTC)


 * Yep, fair enough. I was thinking specifically of PNG, where Australia I'm fairly sure *is* the largest aid donor.  Fix it.  --Robert Merkel 30 June 2005 06:27 (UTC)

Queen
Hi Robert!

I'm a fan of Queen, so I have read the article. Quite good. Have you written most of the parts?

And I've read the discussion, but didn't really understand about what you've discussed (I'm from Germany ;-) )

Is there no big interess in Queen (because in the discussion seldom somebody writes something).

Anna Makievski 3 July 2005 18:21 (UTC)

Hi Robert!

I've answered you on the Queen discussion page. Why don't you answer?

Hope to hear from you.

Anna Makievski 18:25, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Basketball Court
Hi - if you're not too busy, could you please edit Image:Basketball court dimensions.png to remove the dotted semicircle inside the restricted area? The FIBA rule changes in 2003 mean that the jump ball circles at either end of the court are no longer there - they using the alternating posession rule. The solid semicircle remains, it determines where the free-throw shooter can stand. I would do this myself, but I don't know how. Thanks. Neonumbers 8 July 2005 12:26 (UTC)


 * OK, it's on my todo list. --Robert Merkel 9 July 2005 01:56 (UTC)

How certain are the scientists
..that AIDS originated from sub-sahara Africa? Like 100% (like knowing the earth is round) or just 99 %? Is it in dispute, and are there any conclusive evidence which makes it a fact? Mandel July 9, 2005 10:14 (UTC)

How to Program a Computer

 * Many thanks for your comprehensive response at WP:RD. I'll look into it all, I just didn't know where to start. Feel free to provide additional stuff (there or on my talk page) as to whatever comes to mind. hydnjo talk 02:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

AIDS article needs your help to make it a Featured Article
Hi there! In an effort to make the article here on AIDS the best possible before trying to submit it as a "Featured Article", I've looked up some active submitters in the last month or so and found you. Please, take a little time to go by the AIDS article and it's Talk page to see how you can help. One rather large source of confusion and complication, the References/External Links section, has just been cleaned and polished, thus your experience should be much more tolerable in general ;).

AIDS is a very serious world wide issue; never before have we needed to spread AIDS education as much as we do now. We need as many people as possible working together to make this article on AIDS the best it can be. Hope to see your contributions soon! JoeSmack (talk) 23:47, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

hockey image
You made a nice hockey field diagram. Could you make one for cricket? If you agree, I'll tell you how exactly I need it. =Nichalp «Talk»=  13:08, August 12, 2005 (UTC)


 * Sure, if you specify exactly what you want, and it doesn't require any actual artistic skill. I can do diagrams, not pictures! --Robert Merkel 13:16, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I want to replace this image: Image:Cricketfieldmswd.png. (I assume you must be knowing something about cricket since you're an Aussie :) ). I need four images, (all related so don't worry). The problem with this image is:


 * 1) that the 30 yard circle is more of a circle here. It needs to be an oval (a racetrack oval).
 * 2) There should be two 15 yard circles (dotted), centred around each wicket.
 * 3) The ground boundary should be a normal ellipse. (not like this ugly circle)
 * 4) *The exact ground specifications are mentioned in the cricket article. A scaled (exact specifications) image would be ideal. A very high resolution is needed so that we could use it for other purposes.


 * Images needed:
 * 1) Image of the pitch and field only (no rings)
 * 2) Image of the rings: 15 and 30 yard. (2 images). One coloured like the the above image, and the other plain (just a single shade of green).
 * 3) Image to replace the above (I'll explain more about that later).

I hope it isn't too difficult or too stressful for you. I couldn't find a way to draw the racetrack type oval. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»=  13:41, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

New scientific approach to AIDS
Grcampbell is curently editing the HIV/AIDS articles based on his recent research in the field. His statements include: "AIDS is the most severe manifestation of infection with HIV." and also "The CDC lists numerous opportunistic infections and cancers that, in the presence of HIV infection, constitute an AIDS diagnosis."

I have encouraged him to provide references to support his edits

He has also been documenting the different AIDS definitons in use in different countries.

I recognise that this is a major change of direction. He also wants to say that HIV antibodies can mean that a person will NOT progess to AIDS. Sci guy 08:39, 13 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, antibodies against the Tat protein of HIV have been correlated many times with long term survival and stable non-progression to AIDS. Rober Gallo has published something to this effect in scientific literature, as has Barbara Ensoli, the researcher working on a Tat vaccine. See Re et al., 1996, 2001; Zagury et al., 1998; Rezza et al., 2005. --Grcampbell 17:11, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

AIDS reversion
If you check the edit history of the article, you should see that I am anything but an apologist for AIDS denialists. The reason why I did such a big revert is simple; I have been trying to deal with Sci Guy and his cronies/sockpuppets for months on and off, and after a while you get to the point where there is no point debating with them; the only way to deal with their perpetual rubbish reinsertion was to simply revert to a known good version. The easiest way to identify a known good version was the last version of an editor I know and trust; that happened to be Raul's version. If I blew away a more accurate version in the process, I'm sorry.

That being said, while you may be happy with the scientific accuracy of the present version I have some concerns about its readability. What's wrong with calling AIDS a disease caused by HIV, at least for an introductory paragraph? --Robert Merkel 16:14, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * read the newest version, it states just that!

"AIDS is an acronym for Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome and is defined as a collection of symptoms and infections resulting from the depletion of the immune system caused by infection with HIV." --Grcampbell 17:11, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Thankyou so much!
Thanks so much for your help with my question on the nuclear fission of 1g of U-236. You were immensely helpful and told me exactly what I needed to know. s p l i n t a x  (talk) 15:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Answer For Robert
Robert, thanks for your note on my talk page. I read with interest the Surveillance aircraft site and enjoyed it. I don't have the time to really get into editing and changing it, but per your request, entered some comments on the Talk page. I'll look forward to your feedback.

David Dempster 06:34, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

RD and Dubya
Props to you for answering that tricky question with fairness, honesty, and a lack of rhetoric. Garrett Albright 12:50, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Good work at WP:RD
Great work you're doing at WP:RD. Just thought I'd tell you, I'm trying to help out with answering some of the questions, but it's pretty clear that you've got more expertise than I :) s <font color="#666666">p <font color="#999999">l <font color="#BBBBBB">i <font color="#BBBBBB">n <font color="#999999">t <font color="#666666">a <font color="#333333">x  <font color="#333333">(talk) 05:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Splintax, I have the benefit of roughly a decade more formal education, and nearly twice as much life experience, as you. Besides, I'm practising for Temptation :-) I really should restrict myself to answering the hard questions though, otherwise I waste too much work time.  --Robert Merkel 05:24, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Just a word of thanks
You seem like one of the good guys around Wikipedia. Just thought I'd come by and say a word of thanks - your work is really appreciated here! Take care, and have an awesome day! --216.191.200.1 14:52, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia Meetup
Are you going to be around for a Wikipedia meetup in Melbourne in 3 weeks' time? Details at Meetup/Melbourne. -- Tim Starling 06:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Source of Gough rally photo
Hi Robert. The photo has been sourced from whitlamdismissal.com. These are public domain images taken or produced by the media at the time of the Dismissal. They have been reposted by this website and are available as a historical resource. It is my understanding that the owner of the site has sourced much of the material from media of the time, such as older newspapers. Evolver of Borg 21:05: 10 November 2005 (UTC)


 * In that case, it's not public domain and won't be public domain for many, many years to come. Unfortunately, the use of such material doesn't seem to fall within fair use.  The owner of the site probably has a pretty strong case under both fair use and fair dealing, but Wikipedia has a different policy.  So, sadly, the image might have to go.  --Robert Merkel 10:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Interesting name
Are you affiliated with Angela Merkel?


 * If I had a dollar for every time I've been asked that question recently, I'd have enough to take a holiday to Germany :) The answer is no, we are not related as far back as I know my own genealogy (though, obviously, if you go back far enough everybody shares common ancestors).  Merkel is a reasonably common German name.  As to her politics, I fit comfortably into the centre-left in the Australian context and so she's on the other side of the fence, but Germany's political system and hot issues are somewhat different to Australia's.  --Robert Merkel 05:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

fart v flatulence
please vote on fart vs flatulence on the flatulence talk page. especially if you call 'em farts. -Justforasecond 06:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Sources for Takanori Yoshioka
Hello, sometime ago you added a fair bit of content to Takanori Yoshioka. As you may be aware, we are currently trying to improve Wikipedia's accuracy and reliability by making sure articles cite the sources used to created them. Do you remember what websites, books, or other places you learnt the information that you added to Takanori Yoshioka? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? Thank you very much. - SimonP 15:23, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Done. The source was another article and the Olympics website.  --Robert Merkel 08:50, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the entry on Zali Steggall. Andjam 02:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Date links
Hi,

I am seeking permission to use a bot to reduce date links in accordance with the Manual of Style. Could you say a word in support at: Wikipedia_talk:Bots? Thanks. Bobblewik 14:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Paul Barry
Well Mr. Merkel, we are having a good laugh about this entire situation. It is unfortunate that you have decided to exclude Paul Barry, member of the OFSAA hall of Fame, and teacher at one of the best schools in Canada, possibly North America. When we are insulting you, we really could care less about grammar and spelling, we are not hoping to get an A in insulting 101. We could really couldn't care less. I am sorry you have been offended by our grammar but you are not our English teacher and with the academic reputation of the St. Michael's I think you should watch what you say.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:8796"


 * I, too, am laughing; I find it funny that children from one of the self-proclaimed "best schools in Canada" would so identifiably make gooses of themselves.


 * Anyway, back to the substantive issue. I liked my teachers too.  But please read what I originally posted at Talk:Paul Barry.  The Australian-based journalist is a nationally-renknowned broadcaster whose face is instantly familiar to millions of Aussies, has written big-selling books, and received several Walkley awards (the nationally-recognised journalism awards).  I think many times more people are likely to be searching for him than your teacher; even if the Wikipedia collectively decides your teacher is notable enough for an article, therefore, the journalist should be at the Paul Barry slot in the encyclopedia, with a pointer to Paul Barry (teacher).  As to whether your teacher should have an article at all, I'm just reflecting Wikipedia policy on inclusion of biographies.  Oh, and as to the academic reputation of St. Michael's, I really wouldn't know being half the world away. But I would treat an article about a teacher at Melbourne Grammar School, Scotch College, or for that matter Eton College pretty much the same unless they had some special reason for having an article about them, like Paul Sheahan. --Robert Merkel 23:28, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

You must understand our frusteration. Our article had been up there for some time, the Paul Barry link for the St. Michael's page on Wikipedia (I suggest you read it) used to lead to an article on Paul Barry, now it leads to this journalist.

Kate Ritchie
I would weigh in, but I don't want to be associated with your position that your opponents are "perverts" and "sickos". I suggest you refactor your comments to remove the ad hominem personal attacks. Snottygobble | Talk 04:38, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I've done so. That said, what would you call people who get their jollies from watching stolen private videotapes?  --Robert Merkel 05:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You might be able to convince me that these people are perverts, but you'll never convince me that it is acceptable to label them such. Just because someone is obese doesn't make it okay to call them "fatso". Snottygobble | Talk 06:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Nuclear power phase-out
On Talk:Nuclear power phase-out you stated can the gratutitous insults in answer to one of my comments in the discussion. I just found it now and think it is very harsh, probably a misunderstanding on your side, given that it was unqualified criticism and not unqualified critic what I wrote. I hope you see the difference and understand that after a previous lengthy discussion on the same page of the issue in question I had neither much patience to discuss it again, nor did I see the need to discuss it again. Ben T/C 15:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Very well. It's a long time ago, and the article has moved on considerably from then.  In essence, I still think the poster was right and you are wrong, and that you aren't giving views different from your own a fair hearing, and in fact are being rudely dismissive.  Talking of a "nuclear-power phase out" in Australia is clearly a nonsense; it's never been phased in!  And, secondly, Wikipedia policy is *not* to do two independent articles representing two perspectives on an issue; it's to do one article representing both sides of the story.  I'm sorry if you took offence at my wording, but I stand by the substantive point.  --Robert Merkel 22:48, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The article was always developing. It was a brand new article back then and we had many discussions about whether or not it was POV that this or that country was mentioned in the article. Australians seemed to be especially insistent their country was not mentioned as a country that was not phasing out and many rediculous claims were made. It was a waste of time to discuss it again then and we were all sick of it. If you are too proud to apologize, be it. Ben T/C 13:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sturmgrenadier]
hi, there is an organized campaign to save the above self-promotional vanity games-club page from deletion.... i'm wondering if you'd be willing to take a look and voice your opinion? normally i wouldnt care but (a) i hate organized campaigns from groups of users (especially when they have vested interests but dont declare them) and (b) when challenged about it, they suggested i try it myself! so here i am.... cheers! Zzzzz 20:43, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject AFL
G'day mate, noticed your great work on Australian business et al, was wondering if you shared the same passion for sports, particularly Australian rules? If so, I suggest you check out WikiProject AFL, would be good to have your skills on board for the project. Cheers, Rogerthat 08:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Newspapers used instead of blogs
I would like your feedback on the use of newspapers as a source instead of blogs. In the case of the Robert Clark Young article, I have found newspaper sources that cover much of the same material as the blogs that have been used in the article. When I replaced the blog sources with the newspaper sources, Alabamaboy reverted every single one of my edits. Also, very strangely, he accused me on the discussion page of being Mr. Young himself!

This is the Wikipedia Guideline I am trying to follow with my edits:

"Publications with teams of fact-checkers, reporters, editors, lawyers, and managers — like the New York Times or The Times of London — are likely to be reliable, and are regarded as reputable sources for the purposes of Wikipedia. At the other end of the reliability scale lie personal websites, weblogs (blogs), bulletin boards, and Usenet posts, which are not acceptable as sources."

Thus, I have replaced the blog sources with newspaper sources. Again, let me stress that this has not led to much change in the text of the article itself--what I'm trying to do here is change the nature of the sources so that they themselves comply with Wikipedia Guidelines.

Could Alabamaboy and I get some feedback on this? I wonder if you could go over to the Robert Clark Young history and compare both versions of the sourcing--the one using newspapers, and the one using blogs. Thank you. Berenise 01:19, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You should be aware that there are three reasons the article was reverted: 1) Berenise made the changes despite a lack of consensus and my objections on the Talk:Robert Clark Young. In short, the online references are refered to in the newspaper and print articles, making the online sources primary sources. The article also has many print sources which complement and add to the online sources. 2) The edits made the article less NPOV b/c they removed opposing viewpoints. While these references may be online, they are from credible named sources who are considered experts in their respected areas. 3) There is a strong possibility that Berenise is Robert Clark Young. Young previously edited the article about himself and most of Berenise's edits since coming to Wikipedia have been to the Young article. I'm trying to clear this up with Berenise; once she proves she is not Young I'd love to get opinions from other editors about this situation. For full details, see Talk:Robert Clark Young. --Alabamaboy 01:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Kezza
Thank you for tidying up my rewrite of the Crikey story - I was trying to figure out how to credit it and I was not sure whether the credit should go the AFR whence the inspiration of the Crikey par came from. Also what is the go with crediting a web based publication as the original can be deleted?

As to the the question of adding some details of the close personal friend, should we wait until there is some more doco?

Thanks for yr time Albatross2147 12:49, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the footnote is satisfactory at this point. As to the "close personal friend", I don't think it's likely that there will be more documentation.  That he gave the woman millions of dollars worth of property, and spent a good deal of time with her, is well established.  Maybe I can stick to the line the Fairfax press used. --Robert Merkel 22:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I put in a short para with reference to SMH article - revert if you wish -- Albatross2147 23:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Who rules
I notice that you have a ongoing interest in documenting Australian companies. A few years ago a couple of internet whizzes created a Flash tool called Who Rules which graphicly demonstrated the "incestuous" inter-relationships between the directors of the top 500 US corporations. I am wondering if one could add some kind of box in the company entry with a list of directors of the company (as at a certain date). I know this info is available via D&B and Connect4 dbases but I feel that Wikipedia could be a way of making this info more widely available. I would be interested in yr opinion on this. -- Albatross2147 23:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The Board of Directors is certainly appropriate information for a public company; somebody who is a director of a large public company (for some definition of "large") is probably notable enough for a Wikipedia entry in themselves, particularly if they hold multiple directorships. For smaller companies probably only the CEO and chairperson are notable.  --Robert Merkel 00:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Well perhaps we could start at the RBA and list the board members there. Then list the directors of the public companies etc that RBA dirs sit on and so on -- Albatross2147 00:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Just a line to say hello
Robert, With regard to your recent complaint, let me briefly bring you into a rather too-long-to-read dialogue - part of which wrangles with the delicate matter brought up in context by Simesa. To wit: that nuclear reactor operators have been given a free ride with respect to certain risks, and the accusation by nuke-watchers has been that such would in fact encourage operators to ignore safety requirements. Simesa (and perhaps others) have argued from personal experience that owners would not ignore safeguards in spite of the free-ride. This is proof positive that in fact Simesa has been verifiably wrong all along, and that his personal inquisition to use Wikipedia as a mouthpiece for lies of the NRC has been exposed for the fraud it has been all along. In a word, Nuclear energy is dangerous, and the NRC is complicit in covering up serious safety concerns for systemic reasons - ie - the NRC is not neutral, but rather is composed and funded by nuclear proponents. All I'm hoping for is that Wikipedia could try to see past the industry lobby and report with balance.

Cheers,

Benjamin Gatti 03:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Ben, I know it may be hard to see, but your comment on the talk page didn't seem to have any direct contribution to make to the page, and further seemed designed to provoke an angry response. In my judgement it was a comment that you would have been better off not making.  It would help your cause, in my view, to restrict your clashes to substantive issues rather than irrelevancies like personally embarrassing others who have disagreed with you, however tempting personal vindication might be.  --Robert Merkel 04:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You are probably right. Having traveled or lived in some 10 countries, I am familiar with persistent failure to communicate. From where I sit, Simesa is admitting that there may be some serious problems with his professed position, and yeah, I was ribbing him in a friendly way with an "apology accepted" spoof. I think you'll find that User:Sandpiper who rarely agrees with me, nonetheless realizes that editing an encyclopedia is fun, and that incompatible world views make for a more interesting world. Benjamin Gatti 04:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Patent of Peniccillin
I wrote a short answer to your question about this.DanielDemaret 20:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Field hockey
hehe. That was 1997! In the United States though we are far behind in this sport but the NCAA still has most teams playing on grass. Highschools here too. I don't mind though...just was shocked to see no women's pics. psch e  mp  |  talk  08:32, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry about the lack of women's pics - when I wandered down to my local ground it was a men's game going on and I only had a film camera that day... Playing on grass is a once-a-year pre-season novelty for most club players in Australia, and has been since the early 1990's.  I am about as bad a player as can still get a game, and even I play all my games on astroturf.  Explains why the US women's team is so mediocre though... --Robert Merkel 10:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Date links
Since you have taken an interest in date links. Please be kind enough to vote for my new bot application. bobblewik 20:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Meetup in March
I see that you are listed as a participant in the WikiProject Melbourne. If you are a Melbourne resident I would appreciate your views on the suggested Meetup in March. Please give some indication of your interest, or otherwise, in the idea. Even a simple "No thanks" with your user name would be welcome and assist in assessing the level of support for a meetup. Thank you.. Cuddy Wifter 06:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Lidia Argondizzo
I thought your rewrite was fine. My apologies for not reading it entirely and making an incorrect assessment about its content. Made a slight change. --2006BC 04:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. There seems to be some narkiness around; it may become necessary to bash the heads together of some of the more agressive partisan warriors who've recently started editing political articles. --Robert Merkel 04:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Chernobyl and other things
Dear Robert,

My name is Richard D North (my Wikipedia moniker got scrambled by my typing fingers).

I have spent several years trying to understand two issues which I think you're concerned with: Chernobyl and global warming.

I wonder if you might take a kindly interest in www.chernobyllegacy.com and www.globalwarmingissues.com and if you felt like it post them as external links to the relevant pages? I've tried and had them deleted by whoever. The sites are self-explanatory - but it's worth noting that the latter recieves corporate sponsorship.

More about me, for what it's worth, at www.richarddnorth.com, or www.socialaffairsunit.org.uk.

Thanks for your time, and your good sense.

Richard D North Richarddnoth 11:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll have a look. Please realize that merely being good links doesn't necessarily guarantee that they'll be added to the article, particularly in the case of articles where there are already many other sources on the internet.  --Robert Merkel 14:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Meetup report for March 21st Melbourne Meetup
Great report, Robert. It's good to see Melbourne Wikipedians being pragmatic about the whole money-handling thing. Some interesting issues came up - sorry I wasn't able to be part of it. Regards, --EuropracBHIT 01:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC).

Sophie Panopoulos
Thanks for rewriting the paragraph about Sophie Panopoulos' up-coming wedding. I couldn't for the life of me remember her fiancé’s name. Of course I should have checked the good old Border Mail. Thanks again. Blarneytherinosaur 00:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks...
...for not misunderstanding my comment tacked onto the homosexuality question at the Ref Desk. After adding it in, I wondered if it'd be interpreted at POV pushing on my part (I'm undecided on the issue anyway); glad that you didn't see it as such. I appreciate your level-headedness. ''' Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@''' 20:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Source for 1987 PAF and Soviet combat reports?
Hi there. The combat reports from the 1987 confrontation with the Soviets seem to be unsourced. Does anybody have a verifiable, credible source for this? --Robert Merkel 23:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Check also Afghan Air Force in the late 1970s It has full details.
 * Siddiqui 05:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Rods and hogsheads
Were you making a reference to the Simpsons? ;) --M1ss1ontom a rs2k4 (T 00:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. --Robert Merkel 00:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hot dry rock
That was a big concept almost 30 years ago in my Rock Mechanics classes. Trouble is that it takes a huge amount of energy to drill that deep, fracture the rock, and then circulate a fluid. You most likely don't get that much back out. Most fractures will clog, and the maintenance is horrible. I haven't read of any great successes, but I haven't been looking. --Zeizmic 13:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

AIDS as featured article main page appearance
hi there. in case you missed it, i thought you might like to know AIDS is appearing on the main page as a featured article on June 15th (this month). if you could, it'd prolly help to have someone keeping an eye out for vandals specifically on that date, since as of right now there is at least one vandalizing a day since it's FA status. now would also be a good time to copyedit it before the big slam on its main page day. :) JoeSmack Talk 16:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Adam Carr story
Thanks for pointing me to the noticeboard, I've added a reference to that. Post-publication changes are okay, I assume the story doesn't have enough legs that it will require a follow-up next week, although obviously updates will be missed by many people who've already read it. --Michael Snow 05:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think so. --Robert Merkel 09:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Allegation
[Definition]

al·le·ga·tion (ăl'ĭ-gā'shən) pronunciation n.

1. Something alleged; an assertion: allegations of disloyalty. 2. The act of alleging. 3. A statement asserting something without proof: The newspaper's charges of official wrongdoing were mere allegations. 4. Law. An assertion made by a party that must be proved or supported with evidence.

86.10.102.39 11:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I'll keep you in mind next time I need a high school debater, seeing you're resorting to high school debating tactics.  Dictionary definitions , particularly in poorer quality dictionary, sometimes fail to capture the full implications words attain in contemporary usage.  The word "allegation" is almost always used in the context that an individual is "alleged" to have done something bad.  In this case, what Ms. Ritchie may have done is in any case nothing to answer for.   --Robert Merkel 12:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Use whatever dictionary you like, I doubt you'll find one which makes your statement correct. However you did say: "allegations is the wrong word; even if it was (sic) true having sex with one's boyfriend is not a crime". It is not "the", or a, wrong word. It is perfectly good English. Alternatively, search Google for "allegations" of sex tapes involving Colin Farrell, Britney Spears etc. and you'll no doubt discover that the phrase is in common use. It could be argued that having sex on tape is "bad"; or that some things which are bad are not crimes - such as having affairs - and the phrase "allegation" is commonly associated with such stories also. 86.10.102.39 13:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * In any case, the current version conveys the same meaning without the judgement on the morality or otherwise of Ms. Ritchie. --Robert Merkel 13:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mens lacrosse diagram thumbnail.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Mens lacrosse diagram thumbnail.png, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. 80.63.213.182 12:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mens lacrosse diagram medium.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Mens lacrosse diagram medium.png, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. 80.63.213.182 12:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

they have been replaced by your own svg. --80.63.213.182 12:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Israel and WMDs
Hi Robert,

I believe that the story isn't legitimate because the article exists to refute the claims by some conspiracy theorists that Israel is creating such a bomb. You inserted a paragraph in such a way as to unequivocally suggest that Israel is in fact making such a weapon, on the verge of making such a weapon or is in the process of researching such technology. In fact, no such suggestion is a part of the article, nor is it supported by other sources.

Everything in the article states that the whole idea is fantasy and there is no corraborating evidence of any such projects. "The newspaper attributed its report to unidentified Israeli military and Western intelligence sources". Anyways, its conspiracy theory, bonkers and doesn't hold water and spread by anti semites and others. .Guy Montag 23:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello Robert, I should let you know that you are in danger of violating the 3RR rule. If you revert one more time you could be blocked fomr editing wikipedia.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:32, 12 July 20 06 (UTC)

Robert,

Although your good faith is recorded, inserting this information into the article is almost like adding into the Bush Administration article that, "David Duke, in his book "Jewish Supremacism" states that the Bush Administration is subservient to Zionists and Jews". Conspiracy theories are not legitimate items of discussion. If you are so interested in the idea of an ethno bomb, please start your own article. You can include its beginning with South Africa and list its use in science fiction, for example, the Drakh Plague in Babylon 5. It is a legitimate subject, but it doesn't deserve a mention in the article as it is a fringe source, and fringe sources are not recognized by wikipedia policy, No original research

Regards,

Guy Montag 00:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * As I have noted on the talk page, comparing the Sunday Times to David Duke is nonsensical. To give a better analogy, "The New York Times, in its article XYZ, claimed that George Bush and Saddam Hussein were drinking buddies at Yale".  Even though, on the face of it, the story might be bunk, the fact that a paper of the stature of the NYT said it and hasn't retracted it is in itself significant. --Robert Merkel 01:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

NPOV tag
If you're going to add an NPOV tag please explain how the section or article isn't neutral in its Talk page. You haven't done that.Homey 07:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The reason why I placed the tag on it was my dispute with User:Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg and User:Guy Montag about what I view as their arbitrary deletions of material in the section on biological weapons. As the rest of the article is not disputed, I have replaced the NPOV tag specifically on that section. --Robert Merkel 07:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Arbitrary deletion of material? are you joking? We have provided pages of reasoning for why it should not be in the article, you however have tenaciously stuck to your simple argument that "it should be in the article because the Sunday Times wrote an article about it, so it must be notable". This is crossing the line into the absurd.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 10:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't explain it on *my* talk page but on the talk page of the article. I'll put the tag back but next time please make sure it's explained on the talk page.Homey 07:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Smithsonian castle picture
With Smithsonian castle.jpg you uploaded a quite good picture. It would be great if you could also upload it to Wikimedia Commons to make it available for all Wikipedias. Thank you --212.204.66.66 21:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure. You'll note that the image is PD, so you could have done it yourself without asking me.


 * That's right, but I always ask if the original uploader/creator could it him-/herself. That's what I prefer. Thank you. --212.204.66.66 11:28, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Response from Ref desk
Just wondering if you caught my response to the comment you left as a reply to my linux question? Weird, huh? Dismas|(talk) 08:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Very Twilight Zone. :) --Robert Merkel 13:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Menzies / Fairfax affair
I think we need a better source for this startling claim than a passing remark by Mungo McCallum. Adam 04:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I'll see if I can find one. --Robert Merkel 04:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

HIV vaccine
You were going to perform some radical editing on the lead. I think it's a good idea. Rich Farmbrough, 14:00 16 October 2006 (GMT).

Improper metricification of Nuclear weapon design
Wikipedia standards for dual system units require that, when information is quoted from source materials which only use one units system, that units system be used as the base of the Wikipedia article information, and that metric conversions be the additional, parentheticised units.

All the source materials for the miniaturization section (and for nearly all the nuclear weapon related articles) are in inch and pound units; "converting" them to metric with Imperial alternates is improper per the source material and WP policy. I have switched them back around.

If you're going to go around randomly metrifying articles, PLEASE CHECK that you aren't changing something away from the original source improperly.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert 22:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Citation Template
Something appears to be wrong with the template that you used for the Woman's Day article citation in the Steve Irwin entry.When you click on the number citing Terri's qoute,it takes you down to where all the other citations are.That would be fine,except the entry next to the citation number has an error message of sorts.Would you mind taking a look at it?Serenaacw 06:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that :) Serenaacw 07:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk: Nuclear weapon design‎
You know, I was going to write something sarcastic here, but let me just say straightforwardly that your reply seemed to me to be a little of the condescending side. The fact is that you shouldn't have to understand nuclear physics to find what you're looking for on Wikipedia; the point of an encyclopedia is to explain subjects to people who don't understand them. Nareek 07:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And, Nareek, the point is that, in my view, the best way to explain nuclear weapons to people who don't understand them is the current presentation, which gives a thorough overview of the connection between the different sorts of nukes (and the division between "fission" and "fusion" bombs which is actually rather murky), is more informative than what you propose. If people are interested in very detailed information about the Teller-Ulam design, we have an article for that.  If people are interested in understanding about nuclear weapons, we have an article for that too.  --Robert Merkel 01:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, rereading my comment, where I said "you" insert "the reader". I wasn't meaning to insult your understanding of nuclear physics, I was trying to illustrate that without a basic understanding as provided by the "nuclear weapon design" article, the detailed explanation of the "hydrogen bomb" is not particularly useful.  --Robert Merkel 01:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry to mistake your tone. Anyway, I think you're overlooking the fact the Hydrogen bomb is not just a physics issue--it's a subject that has military, political, even cultural dimensions. It seems odd to have to tuck those in the corner of a very large article about nuclear weapons design, or in an article specifically about the design issues. Nareek 04:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

FF environment
I have no qualms with the current environment section of the article. However, comparing their policies in a negative manner to the "green activist" groups isn't neutral. I think Xtra and Calair described it well enough on the article's talk page and you seem to have negotiated an acceptable outcome already. michael talk 06:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi
I spotted your presence here on WP, I assume you're the same Robert Merkel I know from gnucash days. How are things going? linas 04:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Indeed I am. Things are going well for me.  I'm a postdoc at Swinburne University of Technology, and I'm just in th death throes of submitting a revision to a paper to a journal.  Send me an email!  --Robert Merkel 06:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Datsuns big day out.jpg
Hi Robert,

could you update the licence of Image:Datsuns big day out.jpg? PD is deprecated... And could you possibly even move it to commons if appropriate? Then we could use it (or you could add it) to Aussies ignore flag ban at Big Day Out festival. Thanks mate!

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Oops sorry was moved already... thanks anyway.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Uploading videos to Wikipedia
Hi Robert,

I have various nature/animal videos I have filmed that I would like to include on wikipedia. For example, these include scenes from a safari in Botswana (for example, see Elephant Mud Bath ). I think they would make a good contribution to wikipedia. What is the best way? I don't want to be accused of spamming by adding external links direct to my web site, but it doesn't really seem to me like Wikipedia is really 'there' yet in terms of embedding videos on pages. Your opinion? Thanks!

Isewell 18:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ideally, convert them to Theora using ffmpegtotheora, and upload them to the Wikimedia Commons. There is already an embryonic Java-based player that can play items in your browser.


 * I know that playing video on Wikipedia is still a bit embryonic, but your website may or may not be around for the long haul.


 * If you need help with the conversion process, I could probably do it, and there's others who could do it for you. --Robert Merkel


 * Hmm. My website has been around for 9 years now (much longer than Wikipedia itself) and I won't move files around without a redirect or changing the wikipedia links.    Maybe I will try both and see how the community reacts.  Can you point me to an example page that does include a link to a theora video using the java-based player? How far are we from being able to embed a theora video directly into a page, or is that not the direction we're headed?
 * Thanks, Isewell 15:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Definitely headed in that direction, but I'm not keeping track of the latest changes. Some examples of embedded video is viewable at Apollo 15.  --Robert Merkel 04:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:42nd_street.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:42nd_street.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 22:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)