User talk:Sdsds/Archive Jun 2007

Theodore von K�rm�n
Thank you. I was rather surprised to hear that von K�rm�n is under-appreciated in America; I am sure that there is a different perception in Britain. I suggest that you add something like "one of the country's leading universities". Hope that helps.--Runcorn 21:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, von K�rm�n is under-appreciated in America as evidenced by, for example, this history of rockets provided by NASA. Who's mentioned by name? Congreve, Hale, Tsiolkovsky, Goddard, Oberth, von Braun. Not von K�rm�n, not Parsons, not anyone else at JPL. It's a darn shame. (Sdsds - Talk) 03:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

AOTW
I deleted nothing; everything is still in the edit history. I believe you should seek community consensus for a new process, before starting with that process. So give it a week or so and see if many people think it a good idea, before starting actual votes on articles. There's no hurry, we're not on a deadline. In general Wikipedia frowns upon unnecessary bureaucracy, so I'd wonder how this project would benefit the encyclopedia?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  15:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I still don't understand: how is this "bureaucracy"? For that matter, how is it anything more than a popularity contest? I guess giving it a chance to work (or fail) seems like the approach least likely to cause long-term harm.... (Sdsds - Talk) 15:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If it is nothing more than a popularity contest, what is the point? If you're creating new rules and processes that serve no practical purpose, how is that not bureaucracy? Asking other people to comment and seeing if they like it or not (incidentally, it seems most so far don't) seems like the approach most likely to reach consensus. A new proposed process on Wikipedia shouldn't start unless it has consensus support.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  15:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll leave this for you and Diez2 to hash out at Wikipedia talk:Article of the week. I guess I understand your concern is that Diez2 is mis-appropriating Article of the week namespace. Maybe if it were renamed to Most popular new featured article of the week it would be more self-descriptive! ;-) (Sdsds - Talk) 15:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Comments about my edits
You posted a message at User talk:Nandesuka, apparently to complain about my edits. Please talk to me directly if you have a problem.

I was only trying to clean up a lot of redirects and stuff. Are there any of my changes in particular you think were incorrect? The only one that should be very controversial was redirecting Orbit. I promised not to revert that again and I won't, until the move request is closed. I noticed that Orbit did get the disambiguation before the inappropriate move on March 23, and the RM from last year apparently supported it. That's why I renominated it, so that interested people can decide what should be at Orbit; I don't have a strong opinion myself. The way, the truth, and the light 16:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, you reverted my change to the Orbit redirect without prior discussion. That isn't being WP:BOLD, that's being confrontational. I'm happy to discuss with you (and the community) what makes sense moving forward. See you on the Discussion page! (Sdsds - Talk) 21:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Move of Artificial Satellite
No one else has supported this move yet, and if that doesn't change, it probably won't be moved. Since I edited Artificial Satellite to be exclusively about artifical satellites (so as not to duplicate information from Natural satellite) it would seem incorrect to see it as Satellite. Since the capitalization was obviously a mistake or misunderstanding, can we just relist it as an uncontroversial to Artificial satellite?

Also, I accept your apology. It shows that at least you're being a reasonable person unlike some people I'm dealing with. The way, the truth, and the light 00:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bumper.jpg
Thanks for adding information about it! :D --Strangerer (Talk) 04:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edit request
Thank you for the request! I am flattered - my first request ever. Please, tell me what you think of my attempt if there are any problems. J     Are you green?  22:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)



Seeing them side by side makes it clear the new one is amazingly better: like night and day! (Sdsds - Talk) 04:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)