User talk:Dominus
|
|
You say in a MediaWiki page, referring to the bug that categories can't redirect, that the main category should be Category:Sport, instead of Category:Sports. Why? The prevailing opinion seems to be to use plurals, and "Sports" is certainly the preferred term in America, though I don't know about the rest of the english speaking world. --Golbez 05:28, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think it matters which one is the main page and which the redirect, as long as one is the main page and one is the redirect. I only chose "Sport" as the main page because in the main article namespace, Sports is a redirect to Sport. -- Dominus 14:09, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Fibonacci number
Hi Mark - from Talk:Fibonacci number:
- "I will add back discussion of the appearance of Fibonacci numbers in sunflowers, pine cones, pineapples, daisies, and so forth. I have something about that written up already that I think could be adapted for inclusion in this article without much trouble. -- Dominus 14:24, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)"
Can I encourage you to add it? - it is something I would like to see added, but don't have the confidence to do it well myself. I've been putting in links to Fibonacci number at e.g. conifer cones and elsewhere on one or two pages dealing with conifers. Thanks! - MPF 23:13, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- See Talk:Fibonacci number/Phyllotaxis. -- Dominus 02:32, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks! Will do. - MPF 13:02, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I was wondering where I saw that octupus (http://perl.plover.com/yak/presentation/samples/slide038.html) before (from Wikipedia:Facebook), and realized you're that Dominus! You and your site rocks :) Dysprosia 08:50, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks! I am glad you like my web site. And Placido is very flattered to learn that he is so easo;y recognized. -- Dominus 15:35, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Byzantine Generals
From your to do list: a nice introduction to the Byzantine generals problem and its related problems in complexity is something I would very much like to see. ---- Charles Stewart 19:50, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Reattribution of edits
Regarding your message at User talk:216.158.52.121 - you're probably looking for Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit. Disclaimer: I put a request there a few months ago and it's not done yet! [[User:Rdsmith4|]] 22:30, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
AAPA
Hi, you created a redirect from AAPA -> American Association of Port Authorities, but there's no article there. Wikipedia policy is to get rid of redirects to non-existent pages, and someone listed AAPA on WP:RfD. You need to create something (even a stub will do), or the redirect will go away. Thanks! Noel (talk) 01:49, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Sure, glad to help. (I try and use some lightness in applying policy, as opposed to being Procrustean about it...) Noel (talk) 15:53, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
hi mjd!
nice to see you here :) BACbKA 17:43, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC) (just another lurker on the clpmod)
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 "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" 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 [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". 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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk)
Abramowitz and Stegun
I moved the article back to Abramowitz and Stegun because this is overwhelmingly the name by which it is cited in the literature. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:02, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
User:ExplorerCDT
I've opened an RfC on this user for his personal attacks: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/ExplorerCDT 2. Since you're on his "nutjob" list, I thought you might be interested. --Carnildo 23:06, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks. But I don't particularly care if he calls me a nutjob; I think that reveals more about him than it does about me. I don't think that it's worth raising a stink about those remarks, and since I posted a long diatribe on his Talk page in which I explained why he was a coward and a liar, it would be hypocritical for me to object similarly.
- I do think the matter of his lies about the Cayley Operational Matrix and Abramowitz and Stegun are a much more serious matter. But although it's quite plain that he was deliberately lying in an attempt to deceive the VFD participants, I don't imagine it could be proved with sufficient certitude to be worth arbitration.
- In short, I think he is a pathetic loser, and people like that are not worth the amount of time and effort that would be required to deal with them as they deserve. I'm sure that he is punished enough just by having to be himself. -- Dominus 03:01, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I have also recently had the displeasure of talking to this user. He refused to include a fact that I had discovered about colonial colleges - specifically that there had been a grand plan to unite all these colleges under the control of an institution that would have been known as The American University. At first he claimed that it was unverifiable. Once another user and myself had directed him to a primary source, he started claiming that it was irrelevant. It seems that he has too much time on his hands. I too have given up. He grew too annoying to deal with. Mat334 20:08, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Image Licenses
I've been tagging untagged images and I stumbled across three that were uploaded by you: Image:Ribosome.png, Image:Ribosome subunits.png, and Image:Ribosome structure.png. I feel like these might be your original creations, but after reading your userpage it doesn't really match up with your other contributions. Anywhoo, I've tagged them as {{unverified}} for now. Feel free to retag them with the correct tag (maybe {{GFDL}}). If you don't feel like tagging them yourself, let me know and I can take care of it for you. Thanks! --MaxPower 17:23, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)
- You're right I think, the Nupedia article states: "Nupedia was always intended as a free content encyclopedia. Initially the project used a homegrown license, the Nupedia Open Content License. In January 2001 it switched to the GNU Free Documentation License at the urgings of Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation." So I will just go by that I suppose. I haven't been around long enough to ever have been to Nupedia ; ). Thanks for the info though, I should have used my brain some more! --MaxPower 18:12, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)
Norman Borlaug
I've nominated the Norman Borlaug article as the next Collaboration of the Week, as the article is pretty short considering that he saved a billion lives. Please vote for it at: Wikipedia:Collaboration_of_the_Week#Norman_Borlaug --brian0918™ 17:58, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Perldrunks
Thanks for reverting my reversion. Perldrunks looked like obvious spam (it sounded like a 'monks pejorative). I'm glad you caught my mistake. Best, David Iberri | Talk 08:59, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Glad to be of service. I thought it looked like spam too, but I followed the link and checked it out. -- Dominus 15:41, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
New Mathematics Wikiportal
I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existant articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.
I encourage you to vote on the current Collaboration of the Week, because I'm very interested in which articles you think need to be written or added to, and because I understand that I cannot do the enormous amount of work required on some of the Math stubs alone. I'm asking for your help, and also your critiques on the way the portal is set up.
Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page, or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for your message. I know what you mean about collaborating with people- it can be tough, and not enjoyable to everyone. Nevertheless, I thank you for telling me, and I wish you well in your work, and as a Wikipedian. ral315 15:39, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
Mathematics Project Participants List
Hi Mark. After some discussion here, I've converted the "WikiProject Mathematics Participants List" into a table. It is now alphabetical, includes links to the participant's talk page and contribution list, and has a field for "Areas of Interest". I'm letting you know, so you can update your entry, if you want.
Paul August ☎ 23:12, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
perl main article
hello, ordinary perl monk from germany, (beside the fact a big fan of your) currently writing de:Perl. and yes maybe to early because the artikcle is nearly half ready as yours but i see that your article seems a bit unstructered and also written in whole different style. are the japhs here happy with it or to lazy or you think i doesnt make much sense to synchronise it. thanks for answer.Lichtkind 18:50, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
understood, so when im happy with my german version i hopefully try to translate it and show you and the other current editors of the article to correct or merge it, best wishes, BTW selfadvertising-->currently im developing an gpl crossplatform editor (http://proton-ce.sourceforge.net/site/en/news.shtml) in perl it will maybe become en full fledged PerlIDE on top of perl6, something that we miss if you have any wishes or ideas for it let me know.Lichtkind 20:07, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Whether you wear boxers or briefs
Do you wear boxers or briefs, Heegoop, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 22:48, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)