User talk:Sverdrup/Archive 2

WikiReader
Guten tag Sverdrup. Ich habe heute ein To-Do liste gemacht. Es ist jetzt an die WikiReader Seite, und hat Ideen fuer jede drei oder vier tage! Lyellin 15:28, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC) (German is by far a secondary language for me, but I figure I should practice some.)


 * Sverdrup, I've started slowly editing the articles and checking them, as opposed to expanding the stubs. If you'd like to do one or two a day to attempt to get some progress done, I'm marking each one this way (Lyellin checked). Thanks! Lyellin 01:30, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

Cat:Math
Please don't add articles to the top level category - add them in the subcategories, for organizational purposes. Thanks Dysprosia 23:55, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Stars
Thirty-two stars! I am afraid that my user page will begin to look like the flag of the United States. In any event, thank you very much! I find myself humbled, being referred to as a "star writer." -- Emsworth 02:16, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Irish photos
Saw your note on the Irish noticeboard. The Geography of Ireland article needs a lot of help. Filiocht 08:00, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Re: Margin of error
Thanks for your comment (and your edits!). I made a brief reply on the FAC page that forwards you to the margin of error talk page. Let me know your thoughts; you make a great point that really gets down to issues of audience and style. Fadethree 14:58, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Kommentar auf ku:
Danke für den witzigen Kommentar auf ku:, hier hast Du noch "Sverdrup" mit arabischen Buchstaben: &#1587;&#1700;&#1607;&#8204;&#1585;&#1583;&#1585;&#1608;&#1662;

Du hast das "P" am Ende vergessen. Aber kein Problem. Du scheinst Dich mit .css auszukennen, kannst Du uns helfen? Ich habe jetzt alles auf Tahoma umgestellt, aber bei Opera gibt es Probleme und wir hätten für arabisch Skripte lieber "Unikurd Web". Weißt Du, wie man das macht? Erdal Ronahi

Image:Magellan-Map-En.png
Are you sure that the map is OK? I thought that the Strait of Magelan is between South America and Tierra del Fuego. --Nk 13:33, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I know that it's not very accurate; I never got round to change it. I'd appreciate if someone had a good map I could use as a reference for correcting the map. &#9999; Sverdrup 15:50, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sex message
Hi. Why exactly are you removing my messages, and how can you speak for the whole of the community? Thanks. --Cantus 00:43, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * First, to clarify, I never speak for anyone but myself. Why I don't think we should use the {sex} template is that it's obvious to the reader that if he looks up penis, vagina and all these articles he will find an accurate description in words and pictures -- would he not, wikipedia would not be a good reference. I can't see how the reader cannot expect this. Also, as was noted, the wording is simply wrong -- there is no sex in the pictures, only nudity. If you stopped connecting nudity and sex (such as calling the images porn, when they are not), you could probably relax this case. &#9999; Sverdrup 00:49, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * An erected penis and a spread vagina is no longer in the realm of nudity, but in the realm of sexual content, and the inappropriate kind. --Cantus 01:01, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Disagreed. An erected penis is highly appropriate in the article Erection. &#9999; Sverdrup 01:13, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * "Inappropriate"? What is inappropriate about it? The template, just like  is inherently POV. Human-POV. Would the sex template be used on a page showing an image of two insects copulating? Of a pistil? I also agree with Sverdrup's analysis that anyone looking up penis would (or should) expect an image of the subject matter, just like he would expect an encyclopaedia article about a novel to discuss the ending, if interesting. &mdash; David Remahl 01:19, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What are your thoughts on the content warnings in Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse? --Cantus 01:27, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * I think there should be a warning in that article, but I don't think the current one is very stylish. &#9999; Sverdrup 01:31, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I love double standards :) --Cantus 01:35, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict, twice) Inappropriate and ugly ( should only be used once per article&mdash;for the article title at the top. Oh, wait, I checked the source now, and it turns out it is using == blah  ==, which is just as bad). If someone doesn't want to see images of what an article discusses, he/she should set his/her browser to not display images. &mdash; David Remahl 01:35, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Chemical structures
Hi, looks like you're pretty good at PPCHTeX! I'm writing an entry for tropane but, try as I might I cannot figure out how to draw the tropane skeleton in PPCHTeX (or XyMTeX for that matter). I thought I'd ask whether you had any ideas or even an inclination to give it a go? Take a look at atropine to see what I mean, or this URL, or this one to see perhaps the best way to draw them ... --Rkundalini 07:45, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd love to do it -- if PPCHTeX was any good at it. The downsides of the package is that it handles anything other than plane structures of five- and sixrings very badly. I've made a try to show you what can be accomplished in PPCHTeX. To really make a good diagram, perhaps XymTex or ChemSketch is better. &#9999; Sverdrup 10:28, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Carrickmacross
Hi there,

Why on earth was the article about Carrickmacross at Willymacross - especially as I am fairly certain it was created at the correct location.

Seems quite bizarre. Did someone move it to the latter out of vandalism?

Thanks for fixing it anyways,

Regards, zoney &#09827; talk 13:56, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Some move vandal, probably using a bot moved a lot of pages from their correct locations to Willy-something. In the 2-3 mins before he was banned, he moved ~50 articles. I just participated in the manual (unfortunately we have no revert for moves) reversion of his actions. &#9999; Sverdrup 14:00, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

(The user was User:Willy On Wheels!!. His actions are not visible in his contributions, becase they were reverted and deleted.)

User:Arvindn/Chess
My solution with templates works with the MediaWiki version currently in use. I'm spamming those who posted to that section of the page since that page has collected a lot of dust & my changes there might not be that "visible". Please also let others who might be interested know. Thanks! -- Paddu 14:06, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * This is great, even though it seems to be hackish to get it to work -- the syntax doesn't seem to be very tolerant of different inputs. Question: Is it possible to set piece size (40/20 px) with a parameter too, or should we perhaps solve this with two different templates? &#9999; Sverdrup 14:32, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * (See User:Sverdrup/test3 for my template changes and User:Sverdrup/test4 for the result). &#9999; Sverdrup 14:50, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * What is meant by not "very tolerant of different inputs"? BTW the mediawiki version at test: allows these things in a template. I'm not sure what all is supported on en:. -- Paddu 18:54, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I referred to the commenting of lines; if a user doesn't get this right it doesn't work, and it might be hard to find the error since this is not needed anyplace else on wikipedia. With you new idea to skip the newline parameters, this is solved though. &#9999; Sverdrup 22:10, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Culture of Greece
You voted for Culture of Greece, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

Collaboration of the Week
Your vote for African art has helped bring about the article's selection as this week's Collaboration of the week. Please join in trying to make the article a feature.

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 18:26, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

danke ...
... fur den fotograf und your vote for "niagara falls".Sfahey 03:17, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Merging of Critic of FU language groups pages
Hi,

You've marked Critic of Finno Ugric and Uralic language Groups to be merged with Critique of Finno-Ugric and Uralic language Groups. Actually there is a big mess here. There is a third page called Critique of Finno-Ugric and Uralic language groups (note the capitalization) that has the same content.

But wait, there is more. :)

There is an ongoing RFC about the editor who created these pages and other editors think that it should actually be part of Finno-Ugric languages. (There was a huge multipage edit war a couple of days ago, before the RFC went live).

I just wanted to let you know.

Nyenyec 07:13, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Ouch! :-) I knew there was something controversive in all of it, but I didn't want to dig into it so I just marked them. But now, I think I should maybe merge them myself. Do you think anything harmful would happen if I just merged them, so that regardless where the content should go, we only have one copy in one place? &#9999; Sverdrup 15:05, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

There is absolutely no need for 3 clones of the same page.

I think it's ok to merge all copies into Critique of Finno-Ugric and Uralic language groups, then wait for the end of the RFC and the RFAr. I do understand correctly that there is nothing special about merging and the talk pages and the history will remain intact for all articles, right? (I'm asking because they may be needed as evidence.)

Thanks, Nyenyec 15:58, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

thanks!
I am new to wikipedia and your comment in the discussion page introducing User talk pages was very helpful to me! Now I have one! (User:Schwael)

tri ships alliance
Hi, I tagged Tri Ships Alliance as speedy because firstly it's redudnant, I don't think there's any info there not already on the Clyne Faction page. Secondarily, the name is wrong, it only appears in Wikipedia mirrors. The Japanese Wikipedia lists it as the Triple Ships Alliance ja:&. Although, Clyne Faction should probably be merged into the Nations of the Cosmic Era page. 132.205.45.110 19:22, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, okay. Still, speedy means it would be deleted, while all that's needed is a redirect. &#9999; Sverdrup 21:21, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vill du va med?
Hej Sverdrup! Jag skapade en sida Category:Swedish Wikipedians som vi svenskar som skriver här kan lista oss på om vi har lust, (tänkte jag). Vi är nog rätt många vad jag förstår men har dålig koll på vilka. Vet du några kandidater så spamma lite för sidan om du har lust, (å det är presis vad jag gör just nu =). // Solkoll 00:40, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Postal order
Thanks for correcting my mistake &mdash; I must have suffered a brain storm. 18:57, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * No problem. &#9999; Sverdrup 19:01, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ambigram
Dunno if it'd make a difference, but I think you miscounted the votes on Featured picture candidates/Ambigram rotating.gif. There are 9 supports: Bevo, Electricmoose, Adrian Pingstone, Mgm, Chris 73, Circeus, Lommer, Phoenix2, 01101001. Splarka 04:18, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh I'm sorry! Maybe I was a bit tired, it was not by intention. I've corrected the count now; thanks for telling me about it! &mdash; Sverdrup 12:55, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)