User talk:Dcoetzee
|
|
Hello there Dcoetzee, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page or how to format them visit our manual of style. Experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Angela 12:39 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
User User:Dcoetzee is someone who I wanted to leave a message for, regarding limit point so I had to create their user page so that I could hit on this user-talk page. I hope they notice and then check talk:limit point -- AndrewKepert 03:17, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hello. Your self-balancing binary search tree article makes me wonder if you have not yet noticed that one conventionally highlights the title word or title phrase at its first appearance, like this. (I took care of that in that article.) Michael Hardy 02:54, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Hrm, I usually do, and I really thought I did. Maybe it was just a slip. Thanks for catching this error, I'm sorry.
- Derrick Coetzee 13:56, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Bravo on your recent edit to reference (computer science) - a vast improvement. This page was the subject of a minor edit war between myself and another (rather notorious) user, in the end I gave up... I hope that your very excellent treatment doesn't get hacked about in the same way mine did, but if so, count on me for moral support! Cheers, Graham 23:43, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Union (American Civil War). I've been unhappy with all of the links to United States in the Civil War articles. RickK 00:03, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Ditto, and you can save yourself mucho keystrokes by changing from "disambig'd" to "dab" which is understood to mean the same thing. jengod 00:21, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks, both of you. Union was the most linked disambiguation page, but is no longer, although some I wasn't sure about I left alone. I hope this is helpful.
- Derrick Coetzee 00:23, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
re : Allen Ginsberg
> I don't understand why you reverted my edit on Allen Ginsberg without any > explanation. Is there some compelling reason to prefer gay to homosexual? Upon > examining these two articles, it seems the first discusses more the term gay than > homosexuality, and so it seems less appropriate. Derrick Coetzee 16:13, 15 Sep 2004 > (UTC)
Thank you for your input, Derrick. Many people - especially those such as myself, who are gay - prefer 'gay' to 'homosexual'. 'homosexual' is clinical and outdated, and used largely today by those who deem it necessary to deny gay people basic rights everyone else has. We certainly don't call everyone who is straight 'heterosexual', let alone in Wikipedia entries. Given the context of the rest of the article, there is little doubt the 7th graders and the like, whose usage of the word 'gay' as in, perhaps, 'dumb' - or even - 'festive' - shall be confused.
It's only a silly article on a website, heh, however I would be glad if you would consider an alternate terminology. Thanks!
Take care,
- Geoff
re: Goodness Gracious Me
Hardly worth mentionning, but what's the value of changing
[[India]]n to [[India|Indian]]
as the first notation is a contraction of the second? :)
Zuytdorp Survivor 03:10, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I'm not sure if there is; I forgot that the link extends beyond the ]] to the end of the word. The only argument I could make is that my version is somewhat clearer to an editor, and that it parallels the link preceding it.
Derrick Coetzee 05:24, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Please see note on Talk:Basic block.
Yaronf 12:18, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. We likely won't cross paths too terribly much, as most of the stuff I do will be related to crypto. I am a C instructor and wrote a "book" on it (for my class, not to be published or anything), so when I saw the example I had to nitpick it, heh. Technically if everyone conformed to C99 standards then // would be a valid comment, so that's really more me being pedantic than anything. If you want, I can replace the example with one from my book, on page 50 here (http://www.louisville.edu/~dawill03/c.pdf) (pdf) -- of course this example is even more intense than the one already in the linked list page. CryptoDerk 02:09, Apr 2, 2004 (UTC)
- I understand why you felt compelled to nitpick, I'm an experienced C programmer too. Your example is good and has a lot of detail, but what I'm mainly concerned about is avoiding library calls; C without library calls is quite close to a generally understandable pseudocode (except perhaps for its bizarre function pointer type notation), but no one who doesn't know C would understand C code with library calls. The malloc() calls are unavoidable, but I imagine something like inserting the numbers 1 through n and then iterating through and adding them (a fold). I'll write up something like this and put it in now.
- Derrick Coetzee 00:02, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
D, We've tripped over each other now and again, most notably perhaps at pointer. But the reason for this note is that I have blundered across the article Impressive which indicates that not only did you do the first version but all succeeding edits. A good article. In fact, impressive. Thanks. ww 19:07, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks! Frankly, when I couldn't find any articles on any particular horse, I was worried whether writing one was appropriate, but this one seemed interesting for a number of reasons. I'd like to include a picture of Impressive, but I'd be hard pressed to find a picture in the public domain. I should ask someone for permission.
- Actually, I wrote nearly all the material on nearly all the pages listed on my user page; typically I leave a section or two from the previous stub-like article. Thanks again.
- Derrick Coetzee 23:51, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- D, Actually, though I'm not a horse person, I think they're sufficiently interesting (or the way we behave in re them is) that articles on individual horses would be quite appropriate. For instance, Secretariat or Seattle Slew or the original Arabian imported into Britain in the 1700s(?) from which all(?) Western world registered thoroughbreds descend, or the original Morgan, or, to take an individual horse much in air of late, Sea Biscuit.
- Again, really nice WP work. Perhaps most especially in intelligibly bringing in the genetic problem and its traceability. ww 15:35, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent contribution on spam (e-mail). The history you discuss, though, is actually already covered (although possibly not as well) on the general article spamming. There are a number of related articles in the Spamming series, which you might want to check out. Since what you're actually discussing -- the Canter & Siegel case -- is newsgroup spam and not e-mail spam at all, maybe it would work better in that article?
I know there's a lot more knowledge and history about spam in the anti-spam community and the Internet as a whole than has made it into these articles already -- every little bit helps. Thanks! --FOo 23:24, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Or perhaps on History of spamming, though I'm considering folding that in to the main spamming page .... --FOo 23:26, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I really just wanted to give a brief overview of the origin of the term, since I think a lot of people who want to know about spam are curious about that. Maybe it could be made briefer, or an appropriate link installed.
- Derrick Coetzee 23:45, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to leave a note saying I appreciate your comments on my talk page... most people who revert my edits do it so callously that is seems a bit rude, but I felt that you actually put some thought into what you were doing. Thanks. DryGrain 10:21, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you uploaded Image:Yellow stop sign.jpg with details that permission had been given to use it. This sort of permission was discussed on the mailing list recently (see Use of noncommercial-only images (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-April/012133.html) in particular). If you can make a fair use claim for it, you might want to do that, and add a {{msg:PermissionAndFairUse}} tag. See also Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and Wikipedia:Image description_page#Fair use rationale. Angela. 22:39, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)
- The original photographer was an amateur, so maybe I should've sought more exclusive permission. In any case, I find fair use somewhat difficult to argue. A better plan would be for a Wikipedian to get their hands on a similar picture, but locating such a sign seems difficult. I understand your concern though.
- You could try listing it on Wikipedia:Requested pictures. Angela
- By the way, I never thanked you for your friendly welcome message. I did find it encouraging. Thanks!
- Derrick Coetzee 03:18, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- No problem :) Angela
SQL
I'd already sort of updated it, which is why it now says "when special:asksql is enabled...". I don't know for sure if it will ever be re-enabled because there seems to be a lack of agreement amongst the developers about whether it should be allowed or not. It used to be turned on and off regularly, but now the default is set to off, I expect this won't keep happening. However, until someone says it definitely won't be turned back on, I thought I should leave the statement there, as people might want to take it into account when they support admin applications. Angela. 06:24, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)
Sysop
I first welcomed you in June, and here's your second welcome - welcome to adminship! You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. Congratulations and good luck. Angela. 20:18, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
new WikiProject pseudo-code language
D,
I like the idea of such a project and have made some comments in re the language design. I think I'd best be able to help by looking in now and again as my WP time is largely tied up in the crypto corner, where there is also a Project.
Thanks for inviting me. We stumble across each other from time to time don't we. Computing topics, horses, and....
ww 22:58, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
Good job
Good job on stop sign. Dori | Talk 05:33, May 12, 2004 (UTC)
Lists
I noticed the excellent images of linked lists that you made. Could I ask you to make a similar image of two lists with the same tail (for Lisp programming language and possibly for Linked list as well)? I would like to preserve stylistic continuity between all of the list images. --Smack 19:54, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that's impossible, because I don't currently have access to the tools I used to create them, and won't for 3 months. I appreciate the compliments though and will try and think of a way to meet your request. Derrick Coetzee 21:38, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
garbage collection
Thank you for your edits to Automatic garbage collection and Reference_counting. I'm glad you split them apart. -- DavidCary 03:36, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
{{ msg's
Hey, just to let you know, msg: before stub and delete are not required anymore. Cheers. Burgundavia 17:13, Jun 24, 2004 (UTC)
- Oops, I knew that. Old habits die hard I guess. Thanks. Derrick Coetzee 17:27, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
GFDL ?
Hi, we use on french wp some of your pics and I'd like to know their exact license. Are there GFDL ? I couldn't manage to get this info on your user page. Thanks in advance for the answer. fr:Utilisateur:Tipiac. (We use fr:Image:Binary tree in array.png and Image:Binary tree.png and maybe others I don't know of).
- Sorry, these are released by myself into the public domain. I shall update their image pages at the next possible opportunity. Derrick Coetzee 22:19, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you
Middle East
Hi! Thanks for fixing the indentation on Middle East :-) However, the L actually should be lowercase ("External links")… —Lady Lysiŋe Ikiŋsile | Talk 02:51, 2004 Jul 9 (UTC)
- Well... it is sort-of mentioned in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, but only under a sub-page for "headings", and I imagine most (new) people don't spend that much time reading every single detail in the manual (I know I didn't). Hopefully after this first effort it won't be hard to correct new problems as they appear—right now we're fixing 3 years worth of neglect :-) —Lady Lysiŋe Ikiŋsile | Talk 07:34, 2004 Jul 9 (UTC)
Lance Armstrong
Dcoetzee -- I've restored a sentence or two on drug allegations; the lead section summarises the article, and since we have a section on drug allegations, a mention in the lead section is appropriate. — Matt 22:18, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Okay. I erased these based on the fact that usually the lead section doesn't summarize the rest of the article, but more introduces the topic of the article, but this is more a convention than a hard rule. Also, if it does summarize the rest of the article, it should probably include a sentence or so for some of the other sections as well. Derrick Coetzee 22:30, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- It's a good idea for the lead section to summarise the rest of the article; Wikipedia:Lead section says, "The lead should briefly summarize the article". I agree that it still needs more to cover the other sections. — Matt 22:59, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Open map
Hello Derrick, I changed a couple of things at open map; in particular, it appears to me that open maps don't preserve compactness and connectedness. Check it out and let me know what you think. Cheers, AxelBoldt 19:10, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Re: Grammar
Thanks for your comments re: grammar and complete sentences. --Diberri | Talk 06:31, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)
- I'd say rewrite anything this person wrote from scratch, and tell me if they keep reverting it.
Yes, you are a real bastion of civility. But do try to refrain yourself from offering unilateral solutions to items that are disputed as this ammounts to promoting vandalism. El_C
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend anyone with my comment about reverting anything written by this person. I don't actually know anything about them or believe anyone's changes should all be reverted. It was intended to be humourous. Mistakes of grammar never really invalidate content. Derrick Coetzee 21:03, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. I am gladly retracting my statements directly above as well as at the Village Pump (see addendum). I address some of your thoughts at Talk:Kahan Commission, and as mentioned at the VP, I request that all further comments on the Kahan Commission be limited to that article's talk page. Thanks. El_C
Spam filter
I had such a wonderful experience with the spam filter last night, I went into the mediawiki IRC channel and blasted them ;)
Here is the list of filered terms (ROT13 encoded so that the spam filter will let me post this comment - translate here (http://www.rot13.com/index.php)):
[20:09] <wrebavz_> $jtFcnzErtrk = "/((uggc:\/\/(jjj\.|)(rzzff.pbz|cnvqfheirlfsbenyy.pbz|uhxhxv.arg|jroenax.pa|treuneq.cnqhpxgvbaf.arg|rzzff.arg|zbatbyvr.za|mj88.pbz|fw55.pbz))|QryrgrZrFuvmunb|PuvancrqvnVfAbgSerr|jjj1.pbz.pa|agfrnepu.pbz|robbx2h.pbz|hygvznfhes.arg|cncreyrffnepuvirf.pbz|guhevnz.pbz|uvfgbelbsangvbaf.arg)/";
→Raul654 08:30, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you! historyofnations was the culprit on this particular page, as it turns out. I'll search the database sometime for any other pages being "blocked" in this way. Derrick Coetzee 16:23, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Hello. Sorry if my external link addition to the Abraham Lincoln article offended you and any other Wikipedians. I would appreciate it if you would inform me of what links are permissable on Wikipedia. What you label as "viciously biased" merely seeks to balance the majority of Lincoln literature, which often idealizes him. I was pleased to see how well written the article itself is written and I fail to see how the external link I added diminished that. I apologize if this is not formatted correctly and lacks a correct link, but today was my first day as a registered user of this great service. --JimGar 01:38, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be rude; we try to stick to authoritative sources though, and avoid those with a strong bias, if possible. However, I would consider asking on that article's talk page what other contributors to that page think of your page. Derrick Coetzee 02:31, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip and I appreciate the suggestion. Will do so going forward. --JimGar 14:29, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Image license change
Please refrain from adding license information to images produced by other Wikipedians, such as you did on Image:Trie example.png. Only the copyright holder can place an image under a specific license, and I for one disagree with some of the principles of the GFDL. I have changed the tag to public domain — I will add tags to my other images as well. Thanks. Derrick Coetzee 17:33, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Presumably you agreed that the image could be distributed under the GFDL when you submitted it to Wikipedia. That said, yours was one of the images I was slightly unsure about. I apologize that my change was contrary to your wishes. It is great that you add tags to all your images, since that will allow them to be distributed as part of the Mandrake distribution of Wikipedia! David Remahl 17:40, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I apologize; I did check the box, and since I'm the copyright holder I really did place it under the GFDL. I should pay more attention — I assume my later act of placing it under a less restrictive license (public domain) is permissible. Derrick Coetzee 01:55, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Of course it is! And the wording on the upload page should really be fixed..Not only can it be difficult to interpret for those uploading their own files, but people uploading fair use images (which are permissible according to current policy) have to outright lie about "their copyright holder" accepting their incorporation in Wikipedia as GFDL...It's problematic, to say the least. David Remahl 02:01, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I apologize; I did check the box, and since I'm the copyright holder I really did place it under the GFDL. I should pay more attention — I assume my later act of placing it under a less restrictive license (public domain) is permissible. Derrick Coetzee 01:55, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Penrose triangle
Do as you like with the modified Image:Penrose_triangle.png; it's fine with me. -- Wapcaplet 19:15, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
English
Hi. Please disambiguate English on your user page. For example, English. Thanks. RedWolf 02:46, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)
- I will not. I am referring to the disambiguation page, and to the process of disambiguating it, which I did before you did. I think this link makes sense. Derrick Coetzee 21:02, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
wikicode
I'm done fiddling with the wikicode standard. I assume the next step is for you to edit my edits, and then continue until we agree. (I'm new to wikipedia and haven't done this before, but that made sense to me.)
Hack away. I've got thick skin. ;^) wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - Talk 21:52, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
DcoetzeeBot
Hi, I've marked DcoetzeeBot as a bot since there were no objections on Wikipedia talk:Bots. If you ever need the bot flag removed, please ask at meta:requests for permissions. Angela. 19:35, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks, Angela. This should help keep my changes from disturbing others. Derrick Coetzee 22:31, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
beta Systemic Bias section
Hi, if you wish to help contribute to a beta version of a Wikipedia page section designed to counter-act Wikipedia's systematic bias, please sign the bottom of this section on the Village pump - Wikipedia:Village_pump#Systemic_bias_in_Wikipedia. If not, no worries.--Xed 03:22, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Pseudocode / Wikicode - wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - Talk
- Bizarre - when I clicked on the edit link for this section I kept getting the previous one. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - Talk 15:24, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- It was the result of one of the sections above, which had == on one side but not the other. I should file that as a bug. Derrick Coetzee 16:00, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I did a search for Pseudocode and found some pages that raised some questions. Since you know a lot more about the ways things are done, I thought I would tell you my comments and see what you think. (I have to leave to give a lecture in a bit, so this list may be truncated for now.) If there are no comments, then I believe it needs to be converted to wikicode.
- Wow, good job finding all these. Thanks. I'm not sure how I would search for pseudocode, except by some interesting SQL queries on the database. Derrick Coetzee 06:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- It pays to not know too much. ;^) I just typed "pseudocode" at the left and clicked on "Search". wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - Talk 15:24, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Pseudocode - should this page talk about what pseudocode is, and have a reference to wikicode.
- Oh dear, I overlooked this. Seems people have been attempting to create their own standard in the article namespace! I've informed them of the situation and will hopefully rip all that self reference off that article soon and replace it with a link to Wikipedia: Wikicode. Derrick Coetzee 06:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Dynamic programming/Implementations and Examples - I'm tempted to leave this alone, since it is really more in english than pseudocode.
- I feel quite inclined to impose pseudocode on this page, if only to avert the garish clash of styles and redundancy imposed by all the different syntaxes. Derrick Coetzee 06:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I wrote the pseudocode on this page. :-) I won't be too mad at me if I fix it. Derrick Coetzee 06:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I'm unsure about this page. This is very introductory material. Derrick Coetzee 06:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Hash table
- Computer animation
- Datatype
- Magic number (programming)
- Iteration
- SHA family - this looks pretty close to wikicode
- These are all fairly straightforward to convert. However, I really should finish up the user guide first. SHA is a bit tricky, since it very specifically requires unsigned 32-bit integers; I can create a datatype and describe it in the text for this purpose. Derrick Coetzee 06:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Template messages - is it still a proposed standard, or a real one?
- Perhaps we should now call it an experimental standard; I still want to encourage feedback. I'll make this change. Derrick Coetzee 06:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
To continue the list: (I'm guessing I should have created a separate page for this, but I'm not sure how to do that, and was too lazy to look it up. ;^) wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - Talk 15:24, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Linked list
- Cyclic redundancy check
- Control flow - References section probably should refer to wikicode
- Principal components analysis - this might be a good example of a specialized that doesn't need to follow the standard
- Burrows-Wheeler transform
I will work on stuff as I get time, but we have a crisis at work, and I probably won't have much time at home for this.
wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - Talk 15:24, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Linked list is one of my pages too. I'm gonna move this discussion to Wikipedia:Wikicode/Pages needing conversion. Derrick Coetzee 16:00, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia:U.S. Southern Wikipedians' notice board
Hey! I've created this new notice board specifically for articles related to people from the U.S. South. If you are interested in contributing, leave a message on the page and add articles you feel need to be reviewed, contributed to, or started. Mike H 20:59, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
Ocarina of Time characters
Hi Derrick - I'm not actually sure why I did that, but it seemed like a good idea at the time. Now it just seems dumb. I moved it back. Sorry if this has caused any inconvenience. –Andre (talk) 23:35, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Contrails and T
(William M. Connolley 19:33, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)) OK, I asked for a source of the 1 oC assertion on the albedo page. You put in the link to contrail, which... is also just a bare assertion. What is the actual source for the info?
- Frankly I have no idea. You'll have to ask the person who added that information to contrail. Derrick Coetzee 19:44, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Update: this appears to be User:Maveric149. Derrick Coetzee 19:45, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Fred Bauder I think. I've asked him.
U.S. and US
Feel free to revert and discuss if you like. I simply find it silly to have an Americanism so ingrained in the style guide, especially since the explanation for it was beyond trivial. There cannot be ambiguity with the pronoun 'us' and the adjective/noun 'US', if for no other reason for the distinct capitalisation. Writing 'U.S.' solves nothing: if the sentence can be so interpreted as to offer a sensible meaning with 'us' in place of 'US', one really ought rather to rewrite it than use full-stops to aid comprehension.
It seems very inconsistent that one should write U.S. right next to UK, EU, NATO and other acronyms, all spelt without any punctuation. Whilst I don't generally mind it in an American context – as with any American-style spelt word –, nor when it is referring to official abbreviations of institutions, if the major reason for favouring spelling with full stops is to make a Google search easier, it really must be stressed that if it is so important as to deserve being a search hit, it should by all means be written 'USA', 'United States' or 'United States of America' and not either 'US' or 'U.S.'. —Sinuhe 20:50, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your helpful edits in Dijkstra's algorithm. Brona 20:05, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
DeCSS
I think we're safe with the DeCSS image. The full DeCSS code is much longer, and requires a long, hexadecimal decryption string. The image only contains the core function which, without the decryption key, is useless. There's no way anyone could be prosecuted for "distributing a copyright-protection-circumvention device" unless it worked. (See here (http://decss.zoy.org/decss.c) for the complete DeCSS code.) Thanks for your interest! – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 20:18, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)
Fingersnap numbers
Thanks for making my remark more brief. As per my last edit, I think we can get away with a much smaller number and still exceed the fingersnap number. Actually we don't need to appeal to A(5,n) however I think emphasizing the size of those numbers (even if we grossly understate it in the process) is a good idea. Pakaran. 17:01, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Note my edit summary has a small error - lg 10 > 3. This doesn't effect the overall argument since it's far less than the safety margins elsewhere. Pakaran. 17:09, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Castlevania images
Looks like you already noticed the quality loss is almost non-existant. At least, not in the eyes of the people who would see it on the article, as it would need a zoom of at least six times to notice the small pixelization from the .jpg to the .png (your version). And yes, I understand what you mean about size. The other image, however, is not a different version of the image I voted for deletion. It wasn't even GIF to begin with. It could be converted to PNG, yes, but all we'd get with that is a little less size on the file.
I used Photoshop for all that, and it doesn't handle GIF formats very well. I always end up creating JPG files and taking care for little (or none) quality loss. I created that other one from scratch. From a wallpaper. You think it's worth it for me to recreate all of it and save it as PNG? – Kaonashi 22:50, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Oh, ok. Simon is okay. Thanks for the effort and for understanding. Drop me a message if you notice (or need) something else. – Kaonashi 22:53, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Small images
Regarding Image:Belgium_flag_large.png: unfortunately I do not recall how I produced the 500 byte version. I may have used convert or XV to convert from original GIF format to PNG; both tools are available in Linux distributions. The small size does not surprise me, because the flag is simple and compresses well. --romanm (talk) 10:23, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Newbies
Well based on you newbies other 2 msgs that I also deleted, before hand, about big tits etc. I dodn't think it was a problem. Is there a problem with bitingthe heads of the self -righteous?--Jirate 12:59, 2004 Oct 31 (UTC)
Thanks!
I just wanted to thank you for the dab summary tip ^_^ --Patrick Bernier 07:58, 2004 Nov 4 (UTC)
Large box respirator
I haven't re-uploaded it as I already had another image under Image:Small box respirator.jpg and didn't have any use for the incorrectly-named image. Geoff/Gsl 21:22, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking care of it. The photo is actually from the Imperial War Museum catalogue. I shall update the image page with the details and shall see about making an article to give it a home. Thanks again. Geoff/Gsl 21:51, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Connexion
Why are you changing connexion to connection? — Kate Turner | Talk 22:26, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)
- I was only going to change it in EB 1911 articles, as part of the process of updating them to more modern usage... but I don't want to cause any more friction. I'm sorry. Deco 22:28, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Image templates
Anyway, what I came here for was to point out Template:Unverified incase you wanted to format it as Template:Unknown (it's protected so I can't do it myself)--I don't suppose it's neccesary in any way, but you might have wanted to standardise them. Joe D (t) 02:52, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- A good suggestion — I did it. Deco 20:16, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Two personal Qs
(feel free to ignore, of course)
Hello again, I was just curious (a good trait for a wkp-editor, right?): based on your name, do you have any connection to South Africa? (or is this so obvious I shouldn't even be asking?) And as an aside: do you by any chance know of Derrick*, the long-running TV crime series from Germany (which was also wildly popular in Norway)? (* hmm, you might just have looked it up in wkp, though...) --Wernher 01:01, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- My dad's from South Africa — I know Coetzee is a very common name there. I have a brother named John Coetzee, the same as the Nobel Prize winner. I had never heard of this TV series, since I live in the US, although I had heard of oil derricks, but I do like crime TV. I should check it out sometime; thanks for the heads up. Deco 01:25, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thanks
Thank you for the comment on the Infinite Monkeys article footnote. It's always nice to know one's efforts are noticed. Very specific compliments such as you made are especially useful feedback. Your note brightened my morning. Pedant
thank you for your edit to the article titled metalanguage. (I wrote most of it.) It's much improved. Thanx also for the suggestions. I'll try to incorporate them in future articles.
Bert
Welcome!
I realise this is a bit belated, but I just wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, and invite you to join Wikipedia: WikiProject Computing and Wikipedia: WikiProject Mathematics if you have not already done so. I also have a strong interest (and a degree) in both computer science and math, and I invite you to drop me any questions you might have, or to mercilessly assault any of the pages listed on my user page. Thanks for editing, and I hope you've come to stay. Deco 00:05, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for the welcome. You probably noticed me working on article in theoretical computer science. I intend to do (or have already done) some heavy editing of the articles in computability and computational complexity theory. My main aim for the next time is
- base computability articles and relating articles on computable function and not Turing machine
- create computational models article or something similar, describing deterministic TM, oracles etc.
- base complexity theory articles on computational models.
- Comments are always welcome. If you have knowledge in those areas and especially if you have a firm grounding in math I will certainly have some question to discuss. Cheers. MathMartin 16:10, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
May we delete this photo?
Hey there-- on Oct 25 you voted to keep this image. However, it's out of focus, no one in the dog project has any idea what the breed is, and we have no licensing or source info so can't really use it anyway. I can't even tell whether it's overweight or just very furry. I think the only reason it still exists is your opposition vote to its deletion. I'd like to remove it; is that OK? Elf | Talk 20:29, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Sure, go ahead. I meant to revoke that vote — I'm sorry. Deco 22:17, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Decision problem
Thanks for your edits on decision problem. They made the article better. MathMartin 19:36, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ecozone Images
"You should be able to upload a new version on top with no problem. Sometimes the cache will not update immediately. Also, we probably can't delete anything until a replacement has already been uploaded, but I don't want you to be forced to use a less appropriate name. Can you describe your problem?"
- Thanks; I uploaded the three images, all maps; User:Tom Radulovich pointed out there was an error on them (he's right), so I've corrected the error on my originals on my computer. I can't upload them on top of the old ones (whatever the instructions say, it can't be done, it quite simply doesn't work, I've tried several times in the past and always ended up having to re-upload with a new name. NO EXCEPTIONS.). But this time, I'd like to keep the same name for the maps, as 'Nearctic1.png' etc looks a bit silly. The only way I can see round it is to delete the old ones before re-uploading the new; I can have them uploaded again within a few minutes once it's done (if within the next quarter hour, then I'm off for mealtime, back about an hour later) - thanks, MPF 19:13, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I assure you I've uploaded over existing images on dozens of occasions without ever having problems. It is not impossible. Can you describe, specifically, what you did and the exact problems you experience? Thanks. Deco 19:15, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I'll try again, but I've never successfully uploaded a new version of an image with the same name. The old one always stays (and it isn't just a cache problem, because the old version is still there days or weeks later). Will let you know the results later this evening - MPF 19:34, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Okay. I sometimes find it helps to do a CTRL+F5 (in Internet Explorer). It also sometimes helps to click on the version links which view a particular version of the image. I'm not sure exactly what triggers the use of the new image. Tell me which one you try so I can look and see if it looks changed to me. Deco 19:38, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Hi Deco - I've just tried re-uploading Image:Nearctic.png, and sure enough, nothing has changed, not even after pressing F5. To see if there's any difference, the southern tips of Florida and Baja California should now be white (not purple any more) - MPF 20:42, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I hate to say it, but it looks updated to me — try cleaning out your browser's cache. You have already replaced the image successfully. Deco 20:44, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Strange! I'll do the others and remove the delete request. Now I'm wondering how long till I'll be able to see the results of the re-uploads! - MPF 21:05, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I hate to say it, but it looks updated to me — try cleaning out your browser's cache. You have already replaced the image successfully. Deco 20:44, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Hi Deco - I've just tried re-uploading Image:Nearctic.png, and sure enough, nothing has changed, not even after pressing F5. To see if there's any difference, the southern tips of Florida and Baja California should now be white (not purple any more) - MPF 20:42, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Okay. I sometimes find it helps to do a CTRL+F5 (in Internet Explorer). It also sometimes helps to click on the version links which view a particular version of the image. I'm not sure exactly what triggers the use of the new image. Tell me which one you try so I can look and see if it looks changed to me. Deco 19:38, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I'll try again, but I've never successfully uploaded a new version of an image with the same name. The old one always stays (and it isn't just a cache problem, because the old version is still there days or weeks later). Will let you know the results later this evening - MPF 19:34, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I assure you I've uploaded over existing images on dozens of occasions without ever having problems. It is not impossible. Can you describe, specifically, what you did and the exact problems you experience? Thanks. Deco 19:15, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Gray Code Picture
Hi, I'm currently working on the german translation of the Gray-Code Wiki entry. I would like to use your picture, used in the original, but I'm not familar with the Public Domain Licence. Is ist o.k. if I would mark the Picture as yours and put it under the Public Domain Licence in Germany, too? Tia, --194.97.7.22 13:28, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Public domain is not a license; it means that I have permanently given up all rights to the image, and it may be used by anyone in any manner. So feel free! Deco 00:14, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thanks for van Emde Boas tree
Thanks for writing the van Emde Boas tree article! BACbKA 22:58, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...
- ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
- ...all articles...
using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). 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. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.
- Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for 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 at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk) 14:32, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
- Making a slight modification to Option #2, you can place all contributions to the U.S. place articles (98% of which were created by the rambot or at least were modified by it) into the public domain:
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my text contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{MultiLicensePD}}
- You can add any other exclusions or inclusions to that statement. For instance, on my page I release all main namespace contributions and no others. You are correct though that you can't just up and pull things out of the public domain, although if you tried I don't think anyone would really complain, however, they would have a right to deny you that ability. You could try another tactic in the meantime: {{MultiLicensePDMinor}} without any additional qualifications. This will release all of your MINOR edits into the public domain, which may be nice for when you did a minor copyedit to some article you don't care about too much. I don't know if all this helps, but hopefully it will. – Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)) (talk)[[]] 02:58, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was {{MultiLicenseMinorPD}}. I told you the wrong thing. Sorry. Actually you can make your changes both public domain and GFDL. When you add ANYTHING to Wikipedia, the document becomes GFDL, but the edit by itself is individually copyrightable and you can release it into the public domain. It's a strange way of thinking about it, I'll agree. – Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)) (talk)[[]] 21:40, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
- I realise that I can place some changes under the GFDL and some in the public domain. What I don't believe makes sense is placing a single change under both, which is my impression of what "multi-licensing" does. Is this a misimpression? Deco 20:05, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Debate about deleting an image
Greetings. There is a spirited debate going on here about whether or not to delete Image:Nevada-Tan.jpg for privacy reasons. Since you have recently voiced an opinion on Wikipedia:Divulging personal details, I thought you might be interested in weighing in. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 18:46, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
RFC pages on VfD
Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:33, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Unverified images
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following images:
I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 21:52, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.
Automata theory
Hi, could you give your opinion on Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Automata. MathMartin 00:31, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Re: Image:Pademelon.jpg copyright tag
I apologize for my mistake. I am helping with the Wikipedia:Untagged Images project and I am perhaps going through them to rapidly. I made the assumption that the source understood that the content of the site is in general under the GFDL and by giving permission was agreeing to that. I see this is a bad assumption and will discontinue the practice. You can help the project by making sure that all the images that you have uploaded have the correct copyright tags so that someone like me won't have to make judgement calls. Thank you for your understanding. — Edwin Stearns | Talk 15:17, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Sorry about that — some images I uploaded before I knew about tags. I do appreciate your tagging efforts. Deco 21:39, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
EXPTIME
Well, sorry for intruding on your article, I just went through the list :) No harm done though, right?
- Yeah, it's fine, it's just that the Wiki Syntax project has made questionable changes to a number of articles I've edited and it's started to grate on me. I'm sure you've improved many other articles and appreciate your effort. Deco 19:58, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Privacy Policy
Deco, thanks for the insight --- in my humble opinion, the term Privacy Policy deserves dual caps...thus I believe I correctly indexed the PP draft @ Wikipedia:Privacy_Policy. Therefore, I have redirected Wikipedia:Privacy_Policy to Wikipedia:Privacy_policy. Thanks again! - Gabriel Kent 20:07, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Free content discussion
I replied to your concern on the Free content talk page. My point can be summarized as the following. "Legally distributable" is correctly read existentially (i.e., may be legally distributed by at least some people) not univserally (i.e., may be legally distributed by everyone). See my comment for more details. —Alexander 05:11, 2005 Jan 29 (UTC)
RFC on the current prog.lang. template dispute
There's a rather heated discussion going on at the talk page of 'Major programming languages small'; why don't you have your say about the matter too? --Wernher 01:29, 4 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)
Manual of Style
Derrick, I have a query about the Wikipedia Manual of Style. On Oct 17, 2004, you added a sentence to the page saying that the MoS is policy and should not be changed without prior discussion. I'm just wondering where it says the MoS is policy i.e. where you found that out. I'm not saying it's wrong, just wondering what the status of it is, and what that means in terms of gaining a consensus for changes. Best, SlimVirgin 13:24, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Well, what is and isn't policy isn't a terribly concrete thing — I consider the MoS policy simply because people widely cite it as justification for style changes, and because its contributors seem to take it seriously. I hate to discourage editing under any circumstances, but big changes often got a violent reaction from the other people there, so I just wanted to stop that. You might drop a note there inquiring on its official status. Deco 03:31, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Derrick, thanks for your response. I found the policy page after much searching, and the MoS is not policy, just a guideline. Unfortunately, two of the current editors of that page were using the claim that it was policy to stop other editors from contributing, with something of an ownership attitude developing. I understand wanting to prevent editors from flying in, making substantial changes, and flying out again; but on the other hand, the page shouldn't be left in the hands of a tiny number who themselves are making substantial changes and pretending it's policy. That isn't directed at you by the way. Thanks for helping to clear up the confusion. Best, SlimVirgin 03:36, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
regarding your changes to Screening fallacy
Hello, with all due respect, have you read my comment on Talk:Screening test fallacy? If the article's aim is to point out exactly what is Bayesian_inference#False_positives_in_a_medical_test, there is no need to have it in separate article, or at least without references there. Best, Samohyl Jan 09:28, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I wouldn't argue with that — I didn't even look at the talk page, I just noticed that this article was incomplete (in that it made an unintuitive statement but provided no credible justification for it). If you think this page should be merged into the link you give, feel free to convert it to a redirect to that link. Otherwise, I think a very brief summary of the explanation is appropriate, whether or not a link is present.
- To answer your question on the talk page, I believe it is the second meaning that the author is describing, although I'm not sure myself. Deco 21:02, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Spellbot
I was thinking of creating a spellcheck bot that would highlight what it thinks are misspelled words using the GNU aspell (http://aspell.sourceforge.net/). It would check US standardized spelling and international. Once it finds the spelling errors, it would quote passage of text (only enough that someone could find it), underline what words it thinks its misspelled, and post its errors on the discussion page. What do you think? -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:33, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I'll start by saying, I agree that posting the errors on the discussion page for human review is definitely the way to go. On the other hand, I would not suggest the simple approach of running an ordinary spellchecker over it. A more robust (but more difficult) approach is to use context-sensitive spell-checking technology, trained on the entire English Wikipedia, to isolate inconsistent spellings; that is, spellings that are rarely seen in a particular context. This would help avoid both false positives and false negatives, and takes advantage of the fact that Wikipedia is the product of many authors.
- As for how this would be accomplished, that's a bit trickier, but see the ideas in this paper (http://www.merl.com/publications/TR1998-007a/). That paper doesn't do exactly what I mention above, since it works only with particular confusion sets, but I'll think more about how this could be done.
- In the meantime, a decent approach is to run aspell on 100 random articles or so yourself, look for false positives, and add them to the dictionary. If you do this enough you should be able to cut the false positive rate down to something reasonable.
- I hope this helps. Deco 05:34, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi
Please stop sending user death threats or I will block you --Capital of Liberty 05:43, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Uh, what? I've never done any such thing. I try very hard to get along with people. Is someone trying to frame me, or have you just made a mistake? Deco 05:45, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I think it's a nut; don't worry. User death threats, LOL. SlimVirgin 05:59, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
Prosecutor's fallacy
You asked a question last month at Talk:Prosecutor's fallacy to which I have replied. If it is unclear, feel free to contact me. --Henrygb 03:15, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Nihilism movement
I tend to think that "Nihilism movement" doesn't work for a title, though I agree with your changes otherwise. Please check out Talk:Nihilism and let me know if you'd be okay with one of the other titles I suggested there. -Seth Mahoney 06:01, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)
New Mathematics Project Participants List
Hey Deco.
In case you didn't follow the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Reformat of Participants list, I'm writing to you to let you know that 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". Since your name is on the list, I thought you might want to check and/or update your entry.
Regards, Paul August ☎ 19:22, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
P.S. Since the new table is in alphebetical order, your comment: "Same here, Revolver", now unfortunately makes less sense. Sorry for that. By the way were you aware that Revolver has stopped editing? (see: User:Revolver). That's too bad. Cheers, Paul August ☎ 19:29, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
Flag of South Africa
Yes, I quite like the intro now, the only thing is I think the sentence about changing the flag being necessary because of apartheid doesn't read well. I really didn't think the way I had it written before was POV, but maybe I was wrong, but the way it is now is missing some panache. Sorry for being agressive, but I was drunk, and checked the page at 3 am in a hot ocmputer lab, and reverted those changes because the intro paragraph looked kinda terrible then. Páll 06:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Don't talk to me — I didn't touch that part. Only the other parts of the intro. Deco 06:23, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Matrix chain multiplication
Thanks for your annoyed comments about this article — you persuaded me to actually finish it. I hope you like how it turned out. Deco 06:53, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Well, if my comment looked annoyed, but that made you finish the article, then that is good!
- The article looks indeed more complete now. Forgive me for not saying more, but I don't know much about that math area. Thanks and enjoy! Oleg Alexandrov 16:00, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
planet names
I recreated it, so that no one got lost while it gets debated in WP:RM for a proper way to name all extra-solar planets. (hopefully) I didn't read your comment until after I redid the redirect. There's an inconsistency right now, and since stars can have several different designations... planet names based on "proper star catalogue names" would also vary. User:Worldtraveller tends to like it the other way, so I've set it up so it can be debated through Requested Moves, as I don't make a habit of reading the talk pages that Worldtraveller has been using to make comments on articles he'd like to rename. 132.205.15.43 04:09, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, as long as someone can take care of the move if and when it's necessary. Incidentally, I encourage you to create a logged in user if you haven't already — it will help create an identity for you that people can recognize, and would erase some suspicion from your suggestions. Deco 04:14, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Alias episodes (Season 2)
Couldn't help noticing the nice work here. Not your day job I see. ;-) hydnjo talk 01:57, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you. I did 1 and I'm about to do 3 also. :-) I may lean towards inclusionism, but I have my limits. Deco 01:59, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Hey Derrick, I can't see (reviewing your contributions) the limits of which you speak! You seem that (to paraphrase): All work and no play would make Derrick a dull boy. Excellent work on the serious stuff (most of which I have great difficulty following but, I try). hydnjo talk 02:57, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Just so you don't get the wrong impression, I didn't write any of this — I haven't seen the show, I just consolidated 22 existing articles. The same for the other seasons. I was just trying to help combine stubs into more useful, organized articles. The old articles are now redirects listed for deletion. Deco 03:37, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- But thank you for the compliments on my other articles. :-) Deco 03:40, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Hey Derrick, I can't see (reviewing your contributions) the limits of which you speak! You seem that (to paraphrase): All work and no play would make Derrick a dull boy. Excellent work on the serious stuff (most of which I have great difficulty following but, I try). hydnjo talk 02:57, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The episode information listed appears similar to that appearing elsewhere on the Internet (eg TV Tome) -- rather brief, like teasers in a TV Guide. I was wondering if it would be worthwhile fleshing out the episode descriptions to include more reminders of what happened in the episode? This would, of course, introduce spoilers but they seem to already be listed in the Character descriptions. Personally, I'm currently watching Series 3 so would be willing to update description as I watch, but I didn't want to change the content without discussing with you first, since you created the pages. John Rotenstein 05:39, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- In truth, I only consolidated the pages, I didn't write the content, so I'm not worth consulting. Visit the pages listed at Special:Whatlinkshere/Alias episodes (Season 3) whence the content originally came and check out what author or authors are responsible for those. I believe User:SD6-Agent is your man. Deco 07:40, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Solana
Why did you revert Javier Solana to a beast version. That is not the current or the consensus version. lots of people, most of them not beast believers, have put a lot of edits to create the current version. The old version is riddled with inaccuracies. You had absolutely no right just to revert to a very outdated version. Why did you do it? --SqueakBox 03:06, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Javier Solana --SqueakBox 03:18, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
You reverted to the correct version the first time, then reverted back to a Beast version without religious texts quoted, but that was an outdated version. You should have looked at the talk page where this is a declared controversial issue, and where (in the archive) I justified the new edits I made to clean up what had been a subtle POV original thesis offering evidences to confirm the belief of evangelical Christians that Solasna is the Beast. You should have checked all this out on the talk pages, and checked the number and variety of edits occurring since the beast version you reverted to became outdated. You reverted to it in 3 mins, so in the future please be careful before making such drastic changes to any article so rapidly, but especially in a controversial one as Solana unfortunately is. You certainly don't profile as a beast worshipper; I just think you should have taken more care and investigated before reverting. I have reverted your 2nd revert back to the version of your first revert, and hope this is satisfactory to you, --SqueakBox 13:33, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
I hear you made a mistake though I don't buy the "more important tasks". This article is continuously attacked by beast believers who put that outdated text in for a reason. You would have been better off just leaving it reverted like others do, and not given fuel to the beast believers fire. I was getting wierd technical problems which is why I took it to the admins; plus I couldn't figure out why another RC patroller (who also knew nothing of the article) was reverting to the wrong version. If it hadn't been for this problem I wouldn't have gone to the incidents. There has been an edit war between the 2 versions, with one user blocked, so you were playing in to a complex situation by doing what you did. --SqueakBox 21:24, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
Please dont put my statements back on my talk page, I got it the first time. i thought you meant edits. i didn't choose to make Solana the beast. yes, you made a mistake. Sorry for jumping down your throat, --SqueakBox 21:56, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry for editing your talk page. I can never figure out where to leave comments anymore, everyone does it differently. I didn't mean to be aggressive, I really just don't understand how you can deny someone the right to undo their own edits. I hope your conflict over that article is resolved — I won't touch it again. Have a good day. Deco 22:18, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I just meant don't put my comment twice on my talk page, the first time was fine. my talk page is fine for posting comments to, but I might then delete them as it is my page, and vice versa. IU am putting your last comment on my talk page. these beast believers have left me a bit frazzled. You have a nice day too, --SqueakBox 22:31, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
practice
Just to make it clear. Is in British English "practise" correct? Oleg Alexandrov 04:12, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- OK, answered my own question. Won't touch that anymore. Oleg Alexandrov 04:15, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Commented on this on your page, sorry I was a bit slow. Don't feel bad, you're learning while fixing many long-overlooked errors. :-) Deco 04:21, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Bernard Chazelle
Please verify recent change in article categories. Mikkalai 06:16, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- They look fine. Deco 19:28, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. When I asked the question he was categorized only as "french computer scientist", that's why I asked. Mikkalai 21:34, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
template:Infobox U.S. state
Hi - You entered a comment on the talk page for this template about it not working in IE on Windows 2003 and Windows XP SP2. Can you look at one of the Japanese prefectures, say Aichi Prefecture, and let me know if the similar template has the same issue? I'm curious if the issue is specific to the one template or if any similar template the same problems. Thanks. (I'll watch you talk page for a while, so feel free to respond here). -- Rick Block 03:27, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Oddly, this infobox works fine. I wonder what the difference is? Deco 03:39, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Update: the issue only occurs in certain articles such as Alaska and Alabama, but not in Georgia (U.S. state). Deco 03:43, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Can you try them all and make a complete list of the ones that have problems? There might a commonality that would be obvious given a larger sample. -- Rick Block 03:59, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- It appears to occur only in articles where the template is followed by another floating box listing state designations like the state flower. A good solution would be an expanded template including these. Someone fixed Alaska by pulling these out into a separate section, but see Alabama. Deco 20:46, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Image copyright templates
- Response: I am now using the Template:Tl tag on my images. Thanks for the tip. I couldn't figure out how to get the Template:Tl tag to display my name. Any advice?
- -Adm58 06:46, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry, you do this using the syntax {{CopyrightedFreeUse-User|YourUsername}}. Deco 22:44, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
PD
I don't see what the problem is with releasing your edits and uploads into the public domain. You implicitely give up your rights and say that everyone can use it. Saying it may still be copyrighted is incorrect. Anyone trying to claim copyright on something they released will fail miserably, regardless of whether it's actually legally possible. Also, if you can't release your work into the PD United States government and creativecommons who are supposed to know their laws have been doing it wrong for ages. I just can't believe that's the case. Let's just wait with changing things until this has been looked at by people with a law degree. Sincerely, - Mgm|(talk) 11:41, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Additional note: Why bother changing it if there's no discernable difference between a PD or free use image. You can use both for whatever you wish. Mgm|(talk) 11:45, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
- You can use both. I only insist that if you use the PD tag alone that downstream users are suitably warned that the text is only available under the GFDL, and is not available for free use, despite what it seems.
- Creative Commons is not wrong; they intentionally included language in their public domain dedication which releases all rights to the work, so that in jurisdictions that don't allow placing a work in the public domain, it would still be available under a free use license. Deco 23:11, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Free Use templates and categories
The categories Free use license and Free use minor edit license which are pointed to from your new "free use" templates for text, images and minor edits don't seem to be working. They also need to be categorized within the Category:Wikipedia copyright structure. See also my comment at Template talk:CopyrightedFreeUse. - dcljr 22:05, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, will fix. Deco 23:13, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Other unfair admins
Hi, we both have some interest in complexity and seek to provide the most informed and correct articles. can you help me deal with unfair and incorrect moderation on another article? Taipei_American_School they keep trying to censor my posts 68.121.211.14 23:54, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Re: Kaepora Gaebora
Agreed, it's irrelevant POV. Plus I've never even heard of this bizzare theory before. It seems very speculative and very asinine though. EreinionMissing image
RAHSymbol.JPG
01:33, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
Your edits to Link (Legend of Zelda)
I will probably sound stupid but I can find no words to express my thanks for the last few edits you did to Link (Legend of Zelda). As you maybe know, I'm the one who brought the article to FA status and have been maintaining it ever since. When I saw your name in the history, I was on the brink of despair, as I was certain that would mean another hour of reverting/rewording POV, redundant information, ridiculous fancruft and innaccuracies. Instead I found the single best series of edits and corrections ever since the article went FA. It may not have been much to you, but it's one of the small things that made my day. Thank you so much :D. Phils 14:05, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- No problem. I understand how much vandalism must hit a high-profile article such as this. I'm glad my small additions were viewed positively. Deco 02:57, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Curious about Matrix Chain Multiplication...
I noticed you added a reference to a paper by G. Baumgartner et al. on Matrix chain multiplication. May I ask how you came across that topic in your computer science studies? HappyCamper 15:43, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- To be honest, I was just looking on Citeseer for a paper that discusses the matrix chain multiplication algorithm in a more general setting, and this one seemed to do so from an excerpt, but when I examine it more closely it doesn't appear to be quite the sort of generalization I had in mind. I'll probably change the way in which I cite it somewhat. Deco 00:17, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Well, the paper is a good example of where this sort of thing has real practical applications. I only mentioned it here because I didn't expect to see it in Wikipedia! It was a pleasant surprise. HappyCamper 01:17, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
your kylie pic edit
very nice job cleaning up that kylie pic! i'm a new user of GIMP (http://www.gimp.org/), and your edit inspired me to look further into its sharpening tools and find they're much more powerful than i thought possible. surprising to see the difference between the original and your edit. BTW, though i'm no sharpening veteran, i have recently gotten into blurring background for certain pics also (http://www.saltypig.com/blog/2005/04/brunettes-and-my-tender-heart.htm). amazing how it draws viewers directly to the subject you want. mind telling me what prog you used for the kylie pic? SaltyPig 07:48, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)
- Thanks! I used Photoshop, but you could do the same in GIMP or Paint Shop Pro. My strategy is: make a rough selection containing the subject, invert it, feather it, and use some Gaussian blur. If the initial image is blurry, as in Kylie's case, I go back, roughly select the subject, and apply a bit of overall sharpening; then I specifically select certain features that draw attention such as the eyes and teeth and apply extra sharpening to them. It's important that you always use feathered, blurry selections, not sharp selections, or else you'll create visible seams. Deco 22:14, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
OCR can be helpful
Wait... don't be discouraged by people who say that your OCR idea can only be used for Wikisource. Many articles in Wikipedia are based on encyclopedias that are now in the public domain, such as the1911_Encyclopædia_Britannica. Therfore OCR would be helpful. --Munchkinguy 22:36, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
DYK: Prosthaphaeresis
RP
The RP article is excellent. The small error notwithstanding, I felt quite informed by it. I really should start putting up more articles about some of the lesser-known CS stuff. (honestly I think that my college education is more useful on wikipedia than in the real world).
Medieval hunting
Thank you, I appreciate that. Eixo 07:06, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
RP - Revenge of Fact Checking
I woke up today to a letter from David Newman, apparently a professor at Oxford. He noticed that my "correction" to the article was totally wrong. I changed everything back, however added a bit better explaination, as it was a bit confusing before. Also I do not think the formula was correct, (I put an entry explaining this in the talk page) and I replaced it with what I think is the correct formula. You might want to take a look at it though, as I don't really have a book on this subject so I had to base it on my own reasoning. Thanks!
- I looked over RP, I think it's okay, found one major error. I wouldn't worry too much about the exact probability, as long as it's obvious it's approaching one. Deco 09:02, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
transmission de messages d'une orbite obtuse
i am the anon who posted into the pump under the title of this is my fourth attempt to interact. i returned to wikipedia earlier than intended because a cooperative unadvertised opensource knowledge base project i have of late been giving source and content to was hit by a person who tracked a bit of mud from wikipedia. i volunteered, because i seem to have an ability to make jumps without a net across data threads which often turn out to be correct. my beliefs about the mad poster is that he wanted to help, feels overwhelmed and a non-expert and doesn't understand that simply creating pages that link in an obvious fashion to readily acquired data is not what the project is trying to accomplish. anyway, the poster is relatively new here, at least under present sue-doe, and looks to be more of a --|manic/depressive|-- type poster.
- (by manic depressive type, i do not mean to infer mental illness, but instead, um...hiccups?? maybe--starts and stops)
from my digression to your response to my post: thanks for the kindness
but i am no sure if you underrstand exactly what i was implying.
you replied in part:
- sometimes you'll just find that in a community of editors, not everyone will agree with your viewpoint
this isn't the issue. i stated that my awareness of my personal bias restrained me from editing anything on the al-Libbi article. what i was trying to point out was a deletion of a divergent view on the talk page, that came with sources. what i was trying to point out wasn't an battle for truth in a free marketplace of ideas. it was unjustified deletions on the talk page by someone who feared the substantiability of his/her viewpoint.
btw, i still believe al-Libbi was hype, and the US intel got punked by the ISI.
sources in point (links unchecked tonight, if either are dead, ask what would i have to gain from a lie here):
- Arab News - May 15, 2005
- [CIA Missile Kills Al-Qaeda Leader in Pakistan: Report http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=63794&d=15&m=5&y=2005]
- by Huma Aamir Malik, Arab News
- WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD, 15 May 2005 — A Yemeni national, considered Al-Qaeda’s No. 3, Haitham Al-Yemeni was killed by a missile fired from an unmanned CIA Predator aircraft in a mountain region near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, US media reported yesterday.
How many Qaeda 3 are there anyway?
more recently a Der Spiegel interview with Musharraf (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,357735,00.html), where Prevez offered as evidence of a successful drugging and torturing of al-Libbi was the arrest of "14 couriers", nothing more. If you check news from around al-Libbi's capture, you'll find that they werre claimin this info was acquired from a confiscated phone book at the arrest.
Basically, Qaeda 3 gave up 14 poor Pak arses who ride mopeds. This, the mastermind who is facing charges of multiple failed assassination attempts agains a government dictatorship in Pakistan, which came to power by deposing a democratic government. Kind of a stretch defining him a terrorist, isn't it?
Also, Musharraf has said he won't hand over al-Libbi to the US until after his trial in Pakistan. this is a exception to high-end Qaeda prisoners in Pak hands post-911. the sop has been to beat the crap out of them, then ship them to gitmo or Baghram under American ownership. It indicates that the US isn't buying the Qaeda 3 designation.
==
'nough said.
i don't know your wikihistory, and haven't tried to scrape it, but felt i ought to at least reply a bit, and judging from this page, i'd say that augering divergent news sources isn't top of your priorities anyway.
cheers mate - anon from i believe a 174.... node again
- "Quand une fois la liberté a explosé dans une âme d'homme, les dieux ne peuvent plus rien contre cet homme-là".
- Jean-Paul Sartre, Le Diable et le bon Dieu
VB.NET update
The Visual Basic .NET article has been substantially updated by myself and others since your previous comment, and it turned out it was indeed too low on the TIOBE list - I was wondering if you would reconsider your vote for inclusion?
If you can think of any other things that might be good to mention on the VB.NET page, I'd also welcome your comments. --GreenReaper 05:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Good job! Please see the original vote page. Deco 04:40, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Disambiguation
Considering that you have contributed to Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation, what is your opinion on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Alessandra? —Lowellian (talk) 00:34, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
Template:Idw Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:24, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Link
Excellent copyedit and damage control on the Link article yesterday (what else could be expected of you, though?). The article's passage on the Main Page was thoroughly positive, thanks in great part to you. If you ever need help on a tech/computer science related article, drop me a line. User:Phils/sig 07:31, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you for your compliments — I'm glad I was able to be of help. I added some images too. Deco 16:28, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)