User talk:Eubulides
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Daylight Savings Time
Not at all, I was unaware of those consequences. I figured all time zone related articles could benefit from that template. I'll revert it now. Just Heditor review 11:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
You're correct about the capitalization issue on the DST reference. I changed it back. SimpsonDG 15:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your recent change to Daylight saving time. We don't need all 420 combinations, just the ones used for major holidays. Good catch! --Uncle Ed 18:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Daylight Savings Time-Clocks
As I mentioned in my description of the edit, I think that the connection to daylight savings time is weak, and seems unlikely. I think that, unless the artist said so himself, this should be removed.Dragon guy 01:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Do we really need "Red" next to a red diagram
Re recent change to Daylight saving time: I think it's helpful to have color words in the legend too because not all browsers in current use support the unicode characters used in the legend. The colored boxes do not display properly in such browsers. hajhouse 06:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re DST
You're welcome for the review. If you're going for FA, I might suggest you wait a week or so for some more peer review comments, and maybe try for WP:GA first. No rush. :) On the other hand, the worst that happens (the article fails FAC) is that you get more suggestions for improvement -- and I think the potential for success is there, so don't take this as dissuasion. It's up to you, of course. -- bcasterline • talk 21:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Good changes, although there will be others who think the wikilinks are too random. I think there is something in the WP:MOS about exactly what "should" be wl but I haven't looked at it in a while. One relatively major change I can suggest without getting into the details is to review WP:LEAD. Your intro does a vg job of providing an overview of the "benefits" sections of the article but totally ignores the "history." I would put either as sentence #2 or para #2 something like, "first mentioned in a satirical essay in the 18th Century, DST was not actually implemented until 1908, when the UK experimented w/DST as a means of combating the coal shortages caused by WWI..." The intro will be more comprehensive then. Interesting subject, keep it up, I will add more comments if/when I get a minute. Kaisershatner 00:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for your comment about history in the Daylight saving time lead; I added a sentence along the lines of your suggestion. I hope the revised wikilink ratio is good enough for most people; I realize you can never satisfy everybody but I hope the revised ratio satisfies MoS:L. Eubulides 05:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think Willet should go in the intro as well. Someone coming to this article after googling DST or whatever should learn in the first few sentences what it is, who invented it, when, and how it works. You have most of that in there, but from reading your article it seems to me Willet deserves a prominent mention. Kaisershatner 13:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- OK, Willett's in the intro now. Eubulides 19:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think Willet should go in the intro as well. Someone coming to this article after googling DST or whatever should learn in the first few sentences what it is, who invented it, when, and how it works. You have most of that in there, but from reading your article it seems to me Willet deserves a prominent mention. Kaisershatner 13:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment about history in the Daylight saving time lead; I added a sentence along the lines of your suggestion. I hope the revised wikilink ratio is good enough for most people; I realize you can never satisfy everybody but I hope the revised ratio satisfies MoS:L. Eubulides 05:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for GA review
Thanks for your thorough GA review of Owen Gingerich. You've brought up a lot of points I hadn't recognized before but which should improve the article, especially the holes that you mention. I'll start making the improvements. Thanks for your review and for dropping me a note. Jacob1207 17:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your GA nomination of Daylight saving time
The article Daylight saving time you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold.
It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Daylight saving time for things needed to be addressed. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] dst grammar
sorry, you're right; I misread it & botched the sentence. However, I'm still not sure what the sentence actually means. It's pretty unclear. Are you trying to say that people under DST tend to follow the DST schedule, even if they don't like getting up earlier personally? (often this is not under people's personal choice). Or are you trying to say that people tend to like the DST schedule?
Currently, it reads like this: "General agreement about the day's layout confers so many advantages that a standard DST schedule usually outranks ad hoc efforts to get up earlier, even if you personally dislike the schedule."
What about: "There is general agreement that the DST schedule confers many advantages, even among those who personally dislike the schedule."
or: "Most people follow the DST schedule when it is in effect, even if they personally dislike the day's layout."
If you want to keep the sentence as-is, it should probably read as follows to be grammatical: "General agreement that the day's layout confers many advantages means that a standard DST schedule usually outranks ad hoc efforts to get up earlier, even among those who personally dislike the schedule."
I've not read the reference that's cited, so I'll leave you to make any changes. Best, -- phoebe/(talk) 01:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
