User talk:147.70.242.21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] ?

I don't know what the hell happened with that edit I made in the Hurricane Andrew article. I definitely did not mean to do that. -- RattleMan 01:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] AfD votes

I appreciate your willing participation on the AfD pages with voting, please consider creating an account so that your votes will be taken more seriously. Peyna 01:50, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I have an account (which I use at home); but my work computer rejects cookies. So, it's either keep signing in every five minutes or simply use the IP anon when I update articles in the Florida State Roads series and when I have a few minutes to check the AfD. 147.70.242.21 23:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC) (See? I signed in only ten minutes ago!)

[edit] Florida State Road 678

You are correct redstucco 09:31, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Please do not vandalize user pages

Please do not make personal attacks on other contributors. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Breaky McWind 20:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

    • NOTE: The above was in retaliation for my placing the same template on "Breaky McWind"'s page after he/she/it vandalized another editor's talk page (and has had a series of vandalizing edits on the same user) and removed a similar template placed by yet another editor. The username itself is a takeoff on the name if his/her/its favorite victim for vandalism. 147.70.242.21 21:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to. I have never vandalized a user's talk page. Please check your facts before you resort to libel. The above warning was not "retaliation" but a legitimate warning due to your own abuse of Wikipedia. Feel free to contribute, but obey the rules. Breaky McWind 04:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Breaky is not a "cyberstalker"; again, you have resorted to libel. You must be stopped. Breaky McWind 04:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Your own edit history (check the first entry) indicates otherwise. The truth is always a positive defense against libel. 147.70.242.21 15:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
  • You want the truth? You can't handle the truth. You claim Breaky McWind vandalized a user "talk" page. Show us all a single talk page that was vandalized. LIBEL. PLEASE STOP. Breaky McWind 04:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
    • If your assertion were true, you wouldn't have been blocked for vandalism, including two instances of my User page today. Oh... by the way, I'm challenging your username as offensive, considering your editing history. Get ready for a name change. B.Wind 05:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Actually, it looks like you misread. You claimed that Breaky was guilty of vandalizing user pages *AND* talk pages. WRONG--I checked it myself. He never resorted to vandalizing a talk page. (The regular user page, yes--NOT the talk page.) Check the edit history. If it's true that Breaky was indeed blocked (and I'm assuming you're correct), it's only because the Wikipedia system was abused. There's nothing offensive about that name (although it's moronic, maybe). Breaky was right--be PRECISE with your accusations, and let's not make libel a serious problem. Broken Winds 18:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SR 150

I have reverted this edit, as the name of the road is State Road 150, not Florida State Road 150. The same is true with County Road 150. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Precision

FDOT measures the roads to three decimal places. Please do not make the figures less precise. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 02:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorry, but the measurements to the nearest five feet are nonsensical in light of the common reader and practical usage. A half mile long piece of concrete expands and contracts more than ten feet over the period of a year. Since most vehicles' odometers go to the nearest tenth of a mile, that is the standard that should be applied. Shall we take this to dispute resolution, or shall we apply a little common sense to this? 147.70.242.21 02:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, let's apply common sense, and use what FDOT uses. If they can give such accurate figures, let's use them. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 02:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
SPUI, considering where you had your "Highway" I am amazed at your previous comment. As you know from any freshman science lab, precision does not mean accuracy. The numbers are nonsense without context or verification (for example, how is the number obtained? Under what conditions (after all, concrete and asphalt expand and contract as the temperature changes)? What is meant by "length of street"? Precisely, where does one street "end" (at the berm? the white line? middle of the median? edge of right-of-way? For example, SR 94 is about .012 miles wide if you measure white line to white line, but if you include the right of way, it's closer to .03). Each of the lanes of SR 909, for example, have significantly different lengths, but all can be covered in an interval of 0.1 mile width.
Furthermore, once you finally define the methodology of determining the "length" of the road, you must also determine the standard conditions for your measurements... and how you're going to do it to verify that the number is accurate (and if you were MIT faculty at one point, you would also know that if you're reporting to the nearest five feet, that after all that, the actual lengths would not be the value you state at any given time, and you would remember something about uncertainty and tolerance of measurement, both of which you are conveniently ignoring in your advocacy).
But there is a reason that now four FSR editors have reverted your digital overkill - we write Wikipedia articles for the people who read them, who drive cars that have odometers go down only to the nearest tenth of a mile (or kilometer). We don't write them for ourselves. Excessive digits cloud the picture and make it harder to read for the common person (this even includes people who are trained in mathematics and the natural sciences). So, I have a rather forceful request: when you edit those exit lists that need to be turned into actual articles, please recall that you're not the only one doing the FSR and that someone else has to read it - and I am telling you up front that if you insist upon the overkill when you decide to rewrite the stand-alone articles, especially for those covering the roads in my neck of the woods, I shall consider the extra digits harmful to the article and revert it. I have already brought this to the attention of the admin of the Wikipedia: Florida project, and I have no doubt that he'll agree that precision to the nearest tenth of a mile is both reasonable and sufficient. The other three editors who have already made their positions clear about precision agree to do the same. B.Wind 04:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SR 909

This information was wrong, which is why I removed it. SR 5A was on the other side of the railroad at the county line, on Old Federal Highway, a road that had been built at the same time as present US 1 from SR 944 to Dania. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 02:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorry, SPUI, but you're off base on this one. My maps indicate that, at least in the 1990s, SR 5A was the extension of West/South/North Dixie Highway. And 147.70.242.21 should know: he is a coworker of mine who grew up near West Dixie Highway and has lived near Dixie Highway in Hollywood in the 11 years that I've known him. It is possible, SPUI, that there was a little "fine tuning" in the routing... B.Wind 03:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise on precision

Do you have any objection to giving figures to two decimal places? This is what the FHWA rounds to in their Interstate Route Log and Finder Guide, and I have seen many other official records given to that precision. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 20:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../1/4/7/User_talk%7E147.70.242.21.html"