User talk:Arctic.gnome/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on my main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

This archive covers discussion from April 2005 to March 2006.

Archive 1
| Archive 2 →

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Spinboy 06:56, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Let me add my welcome. I encourage you to review Wikipedia's policy on Wikipedia:Neutrality. I think that your last edit on the Q's article (the reference to the traditional democratic process) does not reflect the "neutral point of view" we're striving for here. Cha'gheill. Ground Zero 18:37, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Contents

Invitation to join the Canadian wikipedians' notice board

Thank you for your contributions to the Queen's University at Kingston article. I wish to invite you to join the Canadian wikipedians' notice board. Also, I am interested in what "exceptional" children's shows you watched—were they on TVOntario by any chance? Feel free to reply to my talk page—or right here if you prefer. Have fun and enjoy your Wikipedia experience.

— Image:Ca-on-sb.gif  UTSRelativity (Talk)  03:57, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Lord of the Rings and User_talk:Humanbot

Hi! I just wanted you to know that I fixed the link on The Lord of the Rings that you pointed out. Thanks for pointing it out on the page -- it's nice to catch errors. Please feel free to fix things that you see like that, as well.

Thanks! kmccoy (talk) 04:09, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject Calendars

Thank you for updating part of WikiProject Calendars
This project is a dynamic one that changes every day. Every day, the highlighted day on the calendar must change. If you have time, please feel free to add holidays and update the highlighted day again in the future.

--Munchkinguy 03:21, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Administrator?

Hi, I was just curious about a recent edit you made to Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/members: are you an administrator, or did you simply place yourself in the wrong section? I ask because I don't see you in the list of admins. Mindmatrix 21:43, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

User:Whobot

If you are going to change the names of categories on my user page, please put the new categories back in the same order that you found the old ones in. Thanks, -Arctic.gnome 06:32, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey, sorry about that. My bot is mainly for articles and always moves them cats to the bottom and arranges them per style guidelines. Sorry for any inconvenience. Cheers. «»Who?¿?meta 16:47, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for an Hugo Chavez subarticle

I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Leftist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in an Hugo Chávez Featured Article Candidacy (FAC). Chavez himself happens to be a socialist politician. As usual, please use your own higher judgment in deciding how to vote on this FAC, if you should decide to devote a few seconds to the matter. Regards, ← SARAVASK — 01:52, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of 'left wing wikipedians' category

Hi. I saw you're (like me) listed in this category which is up for deletion. Hoped you'd like to vote in favor of keeping it... Thanks! Larix 02:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks for voting!! Larix 16:32, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

UUism

Hello, fellow UU! I see you added yourself to the catagory, but did you know there was a userbox to go with it? {{userbox religion|unitarian universalist}}--Akako|☎ 17:45, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Trudeau

What do you think of the new photo I put up for Pierre Trudeau? I knew you were one of the critics of the old one, so just wanted to see how you liked it.Habsfannova 02:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I love the CBC pic, but I don't know any copyright info...do you have any idea if it's useable or not?Habsfannova 02:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikimedia Canada

Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there!--DarkEvil 17:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Trudeau redux

Found a picture of Trudeau from the 80's...what do you think of that one? Shame there's no rose.Habsfannova 00:14, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 15% for major edits and 20% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 103 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 11:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

days

Prime Ministers and Parties. how did you calculate these? its complicated. both Harper and Martin are listed as having served on Feb 6th 2006. IMO you need to minus the first day in office (reduce everyone by one) and reduce one for each extra term. JohnA gets plus one as his first day was confederation. did you use the PM's list to calculate party time? if so this gets... complicated. took me forever to work it out at work. Pellaken 01:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Remember to subst and sign templates!

Remember to always sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful.

Hello Arctic.gnome. When you use template tags on talk pages, it'd be much appreciated if you could substitute according to the guidelines at Wikipedia:Template substitution. Just add subst: to the tag; for example, {{subst:bv}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thanks. :) // Rory096 07:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Opposition Speaker

The other opposition Speaker was Rodolphe Lemieux, a Liberal who remained Speaker after Arthur Meighen replaced W.L.M. King in 1926 without an election. CaptainCanada 05:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Grandfather Paradox

Dear Arctic gnome. I'm new to wiki, so please tell me if there is a better way for me to be doing this...you seem to be interested in time travel. I am researching the possible level of interest in a popular science book about time travel, and would like to canvass your views on the topic if that's ok...

Firstly, are you broadly aware of the concept of spacetime, which is conceptually an extension of what we consider to be the 'normal' 3-dimensional space with an added time coordinate? In the same way that particles can move through a 3d space with coordinates x,y,z they move through spacetime with coordinates z,y,z,t (albeit conventionally they are not written in that order).

Suppose that there is a group of, say, ten stationary particles initially at a point in spacetime with coordinates x,y,z,t. Then imagine a hundred years pass, so the ten particles are now at coordinates x,y,z,t+100 (where t is in years). Suppose that time travel was possible, and one of the particles goes back in time by 100 years. That particle will now be the only one at x,y,z,t; the other nine will be at x,y,z,t+100. So, even if the particle can go back in time, it finds no other particles there to ineteract with.

Now, we are all made up of atoms. The atomes that you are made of are as old as the universe, and have been travelling 'forward' through spacetime ever since the universe began. Suppose it were possible for the trillion trillion particles that make up you to go back in time 100 years to a region of spacetime corresponding to the time coordinates that we called the year 1906. Then, as we have seen from the example of the ten particles above, you will have departed from all of the other particles that make up the earth, which are still at time 2006. Those particles you have left in 2006 will include all of the atoms that made up your grandfather in 1906. When you arrive at 1906 you will find absolutely nothing whatsoever there, so you cannot kill your grandfather, pass on technical secrets, make love to you great aunt or any other of the things that people imagine in conventional time travel paradoxes. Does this explanation make sense to you? I have a PhD in theoretical physics, and the concept I have described seems so obvious to me that I am struggling to understand why it is not more generally apparent (particularly to physicists, who should know beter). I would really like to know what you think.

Regards Doctor den 08:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/c/User_talk%7EArctic.gnome_Archive_1_223c.html"