User:Hansnesse/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia! If you want to sign your name (on a talk page for example) you can type ~~~~ and your username and date will automatically be added. If you have any question feel free to ask me.--Commander Keane 04:41, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Meech Wells

David Morose 20:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC)davidmoroseDavid Morose 20:09, 28 December 2005 (UTC) Hi can you please post this article for me with the proper info stating its borrowed from Meech's website it would be appreciated we are trying to get some of the info on a few of us on wikipedia but were learnin. Meech is a friend of ours and we want to create a web of info between 10 or so producers/artist that we have all been working with for over 10 years. Any help is much appreciated david

Thanks for the note. I'm not sure we'll be able to use the text from the site, since it appears to have been written by Jason Birchmeier. To use it, we'd have to get permission from him (since he is presumably the copyright holder). It is not, however, ideal text for Wikipedia anyway. It is probably best to write something from scratch. I'll see what I can work up in a few minutes. Cheers, --Hansnesse 22:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Luther

Sorry my mistake Battlefield 00:07, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Referential Consistency Matters

Mahalo for your suggestion ...

Please feel free to rename Norwegian Academy of Sciences citations to conform with full (proper) name rather than abbreviated (familiar) version I'd picked to reduce number of minor revisions needed for consistency!

Well done! Where can I learn more about quantitative ecology?
RJBurkhart 01:07, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! to answer your question, Quantitative Ecology goes by many names. Here on Wikipedia, Theoretical ecology and Mathematical biology are both related articles. I don't know of a single book that is both readable and anything close to a comprehensive introduction to the topic. A readable intro to part of the field (the stuff I mostly do) can be found in Mark Kot's Elements of Mathematical Ecology (2001). --Hansnesse 01:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Norwegian Academy of Science Speedy

RE:Norwegian Academy of Science Speedy message:

When I tagged it for speedy, the page was just a few links without even mentioning the title. And the old version was deleted; you were the creator of the new page. Now that the page is greatly improved and on topic, I agree that it should be kept. I had tagged it for speedy because the original page didn't point to the topic. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 01:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Immortal Technique

Hi, I have read your response to my re-wite, and have gone through the article once again. See the talk page for moreCavell 02:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)Cavell

[edit] Cybermind

Good find on Cybermind; it seems like that's grounds to keep it right there. I'd just as soon rescind the entire AfD vote, do you know if that's possible? Deadsalmon 06:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks for the correction and advice. Deadsalmon 06:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project OREL

I'm not sure what you are inferring. There is one article on Project OREL (Project 1153 OREL), and a few redirect pages going to it. That is the only article that exists concerning that project. There is a separate article on a similar Soviet project, Soviet aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk. They are separate programs. N328KF 16:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

reply posted on talk page. --Hansnesse 16:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No test

i edited the page on nicolae guta because it lacks information. why didn't you write that he's controversed and disliked by a lot of the youngsters yo romania. who are you and where are you from? I suppose you are a "manelist infect"! Sa mi-o sugi! Thanks! 85.204.118.138

[edit] afshar?

dear Hansnesse, I indeed created my count and signed my comments. regards Drezet

[edit] Thy"a"mine

Thanks! I'm not very good at wikipedia yet... I haven't read all the pages, but it would be nice if someone gave me a link with all the rules and pages about wikipedia. Thanks again. Dooga


[edit] Booren comments

I did not vandalize. User:zanimum and his sockpuppets user:Zanimum2 and user:kooorooo are going on a vandalism spree.

They have added fair use images to THEIR userpages but keep vandalizing our userpages when we do so. I did that to remove the fair use images onhis page. Dont encourage him as he is a vandal. Booren 08:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I did not add in between words. It was the sockpuppet user:Zanimum2 who added in between words.

The other sockpuppet user:kooorooo was blocked.Booren 08:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC) 1 down 2 more to go

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have reported the matter to Interventions against Vandalism, since there seem to be multiple sockpuppets about. Keep in mind, however, that User:Zanimum is an admin, probably not the vandal you're refering to. I will make a note on your page as well. --Hansnesse 08:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Afshar experiment

In light of the discusions, I would like to ask you to reconsider your vote for deletion. Drezet and Stifle have. Danko Georgiev (nominator) never will, becuase he is a known crackpot. Just ask Linas! Thanks.-- Prof. Afshar 13:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Booren

I see that Booren (talk • contribs) has left a comment on your talk page. For the full picture of the dispute he's referring, I would like to refer you to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Batzarros's userpage, need help. Booren is probably a sockpuppet of Batzarro, just like 220.247.254.190, 220.247.252.135, Ferall, Kooorooo and zanimum2. Aecis Mr. Mojo risin' 13:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linkspammer

Thanks for the note. Usually I leave custom messages, but that's mostly because I can't always remember the names of tags. Need to bookmark the template page, I guess. Good work to you as well, and best of luck in the eternal fight against spamdalism. KrazyCaley 07:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Entry for Exception

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Argentine_Army&action=edit&section=5

Hello,

Currently, there is a personal project ongoing regarding military research. The proliferation of weaponry between countries sometimes gives indication on how well relations are between seller and buyer nations. The more modern the armament sold, the more it appears to be from closer ties.

With South America, it's been noted that they have been forced to buy obsolote or even WW-II vintage weaponry, partially due to limited funding. During the Cold-War era, it appeared they chose to deal with NATO countries versus the Soviet-bloc as Cuba did.

The information on the Argentinian armed forces is very useful, though noted to be estimates. It appears that ties between Argentina and Germany remain strong after it's reunification.

It is hard to fantom how they have a 30-mm anti-air artillery piece which is either Nazi German equipment or proprietary Russian. This is not nearly as popular as the 23-mm and 57-mm variants used world-wide. It is especially hard to envision, when indications are that the more available Swiss "Oerlikon" 35-mm GDF modernized variants (like the Gephard self-propelled or the towed pieces combined with the Skyguard control) could be purchased - the latter in use by Canada.

It appears the only other country with 30-mm AA cannon is Greece with their Artemis. So drawing conclusions, either one of the following must be occuring:

A. The information is faulty B. They are purchasing uncommon 30-mm diameter ammo from the Germans, Russians or Greeks while other nations do not. C. They are using captured pieces or early WW-II vintage AA guns

En summa, while I am not familiar with the process of making an updated entry within Wikipedia, it stands to reason that a footnote taking exception with the data should be made.

Truly,

RancerDS

Howdy and thanks for your work on Wikipedia! I will post a note to the Talk:Argentine Army noting what you said on my talk page, and add a dispute tag to the article. The person who added that information (see this edit) was not registered (or may have subsequently registered); I will try to write to them, but often it is dodgy whether the message will get through. Thanks for noticing and your help editing. Incidentally, you may want to register, (it is free of course, and requires no personal infomation, not even email) since it gives you a more sure-fire way to recieve messages, and a few abilities in editing not available if you're not registered. Thanks! --Hansnesse 23:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


Hello, you're welcome and thanks. Further research on the information regarding 30-mm usage led to a couple of references that estimated twenty guns of such calibur did exist around the time of the Falklands War. (See: http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Falklands/Argentineweapons.htm#90 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapons_of_the_Falklands_War). No real data is listed on either page, though both reference Hispania-Suiza as the manufacturer. Further research revealed that they produced an anti-air gun in 30-mm (model designation of HS-831 - using dual Oerlikon KCB cannons). It appears to be chambered for a 30mm x 170 round (http://www.earmi.it/armi/database/ammo30.htm) which is still available from Oerlikon. Another Wiki link shows that 12 are used in marine air defence while 8 were listed as part of an anti-air battery [See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_ground_forces_in_the_Falklands_War] So the 150 total for 30-mm AA guns can't be supported by my findings, only the 20.

[edit] Hansnesse

Are you a liberal? It would seem very likely. HD 123321 07:05, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nonsense and patent nonsense

Please do not abuse the speedy deletion criteria. There is a difference between nonsense and patent nonsense. Only the latter is speedy deletable. The former is not. Uncle G 09:03, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, I will exercise more care on the AfD pages. Per your advice I have changed my recommendation. --Hansnesse 19:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Classifying Organisms Speedy

Perhaps I was a little too hasty. I had only seen the first edit ... though it looks as though (as you've noted) that the article already exists.

The text is kind of odd though ... it's almost as though they are typing out a high-school science text book. Nfitz 03:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks Hansnesse for the help in moveing my immutability page. Once i had finished it I saw I had misspelled it agian many thanks. you do good work you realy do thanks for finding that cite i had almost added it last night but i had lost the rest of my information and couldnt

(TheBlade 03:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Question about Speedy Delete

Howdy, I noticed that a page, Stanley Chodorow, was speedily deleted. I think this was in err, although I don't know of a way to contact the admin who deleted it (since it was speedied). At the very least, deleting the page about the former Provost from the University of Pennsylvaia should require an AfD discussion, I would think. Is there a way of checking why the page was speedied? Many thanks, --Hansnesse 02:58, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi... user:Doc glasgow deleted the article, with the explaination CSD A7. This means, "Unremarkable people or groups. An article about a real person, group of people, band or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead." I've undeleted it, and will allow you to develop the article further, to prove its worth. -- user:zanimum
Many thanks, it is much appreciated. --Hansnesse 03:09, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Would you be able to add sources and or links for Stanley Chodorow? -- user:zanimum

I have posted a few external links, and will add in the citations when I get the chance (hopefully sometime today). Thanks for the pointer on this. --Hansnesse 17:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Great stuff, glad to see the article coming along! -- user:zanimum

[edit] You've been active at Talk:Roy Blunt

I just posted a response here to the reversion of some unregistered user contributions to Roy Blunt. I'd appreciate your participation in the new topic. Thanks. 66.167.137.199 03:36, 3 February 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Thanks for the pointers

Thanks for the pointers!!, just trying to help --Larsinio 20:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Onestudlyomelet

It was pretty decent of you to take the time to welcome this user, given that their initial impression of Wikipedia (from their perspective) can't have been fantastic. And with an actual hand-written non-template message, no less. Glad someone took the time :) Adrian Lamo · 01:32, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Immortal Technique

hey, this is a reply to both messages you wrote about reverting the I.T. article. i had this 'discussion' with user Cavell in december already, i even asked for moderation, but then i grew tired of it and decided to give up. who-am-i 01:52, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Faskinating

thanks for your comments,i have one question though perhaps you can tell me how to insert a picture all I ever get is a link?(UTC)

My reply is on your talk page. --Hansnesse 05:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thanks for the reply, greatly appreciated.

[edit] Pronk

Copied from user page

Hi, I was wondering if you could retitle the article Pronk to Pronk_music, so that it could be easily disambiguated from Pronk_gait. Thank you! Dsg123456789 16:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Page moved, see User_talk:Dsg123456789 for full response. --Hansnesse 01:56, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alexander Keda

I needed something to put in. Please leave my wiki alone. I'm working on it, alright? Kaosth30ry 07:23, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's not YOUR wiki. Please provide content that states the importance of your subject, or it remains a speedy deletion candidate. Ramanpotential 07:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

who the fuck are you, raman? jesus. just leave MY fucking wiki alone. Kaosth30ry 07:27, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm moving this discussion to the talk page of Alexander Keda, since it is more pertinant to that than to me. --Hansnesse 07:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About Jeron Laycock Bio

Ah, its not a personal bio, but I guess he isn't well known enough that I should have mentioned him. He's won several gaming tournaments statewide, but it was ignorance on my part to submit it I guess. I apoligize, maybe if I can get more info, and he rises to more importance, then I'll re-submit an article. Thanks for letting me know why it will be deleted instead of not giving me a reason. Have a nice day. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kendog (talk • contribs).

--Alright, I fully agree, recreating the article would be best, because currently, I'm at a lack on information. I'll have to read more about him, and maybe find some of the magazine articles about him, and get the links, and then maybe in a few weeks I'll have enough to make a good entry. How do I delete the current one until I am ready in the future?

[edit] Spaghetti Monster Orthodoxy

Hi Hansnesse, thanks so much for your considerate handing of my entries in the spaghetti monster orthodoxy [[[Spaghetti Monster Orthodoxy]]]] entry; I am rather clumsy with the wikipedia controls but less so with the subject matter since I am fully aware of the importance of his noodly appendage and how this religion of ours allows for a juxtaposition of values that exposes absurdities in discourse that otherwise might perhaps never be cleared.

I am very pleased with the depth at which my entry has been handled and feel my concerns and that of my fellow orthodox spaghetti monstrists have been almost adequately addressed. We shall indeed seek to somewhat build our community profile before we introduce ourselves to the wikipedia again. As you can imagine many European spaghettists are turning orthodox. If elevated minds from the United Nations, the European Union and the Organisation of the Islamic Conference can find claim that "free speech ... should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions"; then equally lofty minds from the spaghetti community can find it in themselves to create beliefs and tenents that deserve such respect.

Wikimam 07:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Man O 'War

Still trying to reach you about your Man O 'War (horse) page. Just learning here. Now, I have a clean-up note on my Funny Cide page, and haven't a clue. Ki

moved comment from user page

I'm sure I'm not doing this right. I understand about one in every four words. I hope I'm asking you here if someone will ever remove the cleanup tag on the Funny Cide article? I give up trying to understand how to download a picture. But it would be nice not to have a tag pretty much announcing the site is a mess. Ki

I will take a look at why the tag might have been added and post a note to your talk page. --Hansnesse 17:32, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!!!

Thanks for the little barnstar award. I try not to need outside validation but damn it sure feels good when I get it. Ecologists are awesome. Good luck in the studies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrfish33 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Links to X in Relationships

Dear Hansnesse,

Due to your request, I stopped posting links such as Elvis Presley in Relationships.

However, I still feel that the article on how Elvis handles his relashionships is of value to most Elvis fans who search for information about him in Wikipedia or other ressources that provide unique content and information.

We feel that the availability of this article to Elvis readers should be promoted. I couldn't care less if they analyze their relationships with him or not. We are not here for profit and we do not gain a penny off the reports.

I beg for your comments.

Thanks, Midas touch

Reply posted to User_talk:Midas touch. --Hansnesse 02:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Hansnesse,

Thank you for your practical, thorough, yet kind reply.

I obviously agree with the cautious attitude toward link posting in Wikipedia. But you know how it is, we all think that what WE have to offer to the public is different and of special value:) The truth of the matter is that thousands of daily visitors read these essays on how their favorite celebrities or other news worthy individuals handle their relationships. We even plan, in the near future to add to each famous profile factual data about their actual relationships, followed by an evaluation of each one.

You kindly offered two routs to concluding this topic: Wikipedia:Third opinion or Wikipedia:Requests for comment. May I take you on Wikipedia:Requests for comment and let the public voice its opinion? I will obviously respect the outcome, whatever it will be.

If you're OK with this, can you post the topic on Wikipedia:Requests for comment in an objective style (as much as possible)?

Many thanks and appreciation, Midas touch

[edit] Dear Hansnesse,

Indeed we both hold dear Wikipedia’s success as global information and knowledge pool, made by the people for the people.
Allow me to put Top Synergy aside (as much as possible, other than to be used as an example) and to look at the bigger picture of Wikipedia’s function as an impartial yet quality information resource.
I would like to make here two observations regarding:
1. What is a qualifies resource, and;
2. Guarding against unqualified resources.
As to qualified resources, I believe that as long as a given source is of an original and legit nature, it is a valid resource to be included in or referred to by Wikipedia.
Many words have already addressed this topic. I’m sure however that neither one of us has the tendency to validate a good Catholic essay and to discard a Protestant one, to embrace Graphology and mock Astrology, to approve Orthopedics and ban Chiropractics, etc. We need to be bigger than that, put aside our personal array of beliefs, convictions, and conditionings and stick to the goal of providing the visitor a vast spectrum of tools and resources to study a given topic or issue. It’s not only about links. Wikipedia’s articles suffer in many cases from providing subjective opinions is the pretence of objective observations. I think that there are NO objective observations in existence. Even science acknowledges it now-a-days. I’ll be happy to participate in Wikipedia forums that contemplate its evolution from the artificial pseudo-objective phase to the rich and colorful truly-subjective stage.
To sum up this issue, I cannot see why Brad Pitt’s visitor is prohibited from being exposed to an Astrological analysis of Brad’s faculties in handling various aspects in his life, career and relationships, while the Brad Pitt’s “Early Life” section quotes: “He was two credits shy of graduating with a journalism degree before trying his luck in Hollywood.”, instead of painting a clearer picture by stating: “Brad Pitt didn’t graduate with a journalism degree before trying his luck in Hollywood.”, or better yet – dropping this subjective statement altogether.
The bottom line is: Wikipedia, being a people’s resource cannot and should not guard itself against conflicting or untraditional voices. The opposite is true. It should promote such, as long as the reader is aware of and can identify the various sources and their potential subjective nature, and assumes responsibility on what he or she take from it all or ignore.
At times, Astrology was considered a myth and witchcraft. Today, it is being taught in colleges and enjoys the interest of 127 million Internet surfers. Who are we to distinguish between true and false, taking by that the accessibility to knowledge and information from the public.
And as to the second topic: Guarding against unqualified resources; let me make here only one small yet practical suggestion.
In my opinion, to be included in Wikipedia, links should qualify by three main criteria:
1. Can the resource contribute information and knowledge to the researcher;
2. Is the resource original or secondary;
3. Is the reason behind the placement of the link has to do with contributing information and knowledge, or maybe there are other motives, such as gaining better search engine ranking and high quality authoritative one-way links.
In my opinion, Wikipedia editors developed already some protective cynicism due to the epidemic of webmasters placing links to secondary and even poor resources just to gain ranking and traffic to their sites.
I'm afraid that Wikipedia will never win this endless straggle to keep the links away. It looses if links keep being posted and it looses if the cost of fighting this spam takes away resources and energy from important projects and tasks.
I suggest here to change the link template to include “NOFOLLOW” attribute, and to let webmasters know that this is the case. In my opinion, this step alone will cut webmasters’ motivation to post links by many percents.
Last but not least, I thank you for your suggestion to place a link in the Astrology Tools article. However, Brad Pitt’s fans as those who try to determine who to vote for (Bush/Kerry) are not necessarily Astrology geeks and they’ll loose the accessibility to the information handed by Top Synergy.
I’m sorry for taking you time with so much mumble jumble. I hope that some of the writing makes sense and that we can continue from here.
Sincerely yours,
Midas touch


Many thanks for the good discussion and thoughtful reply. I have gone ahead and posted a note at Village Pump and hope comments from other users may perhaps provide a good solution. Of course, I tend to agree that the information should not be included or excluded based only on a single person's beliefs, so in that sense, I think we are in agreement. Feel free to add your own comments, of course, and hopefully we can resolve this to everyone's satisifaction. Thanks, (I'll post this on your page as well). --Hansnesse 01:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


Thank you, Hansnesse, for your initiative. I wend ahead and posted my viewpoint below yours. Please advise if something doesn't look appropriate. It has been a pleasure debating with you. Midas touch


Dear Hansnesse, It seems that the Village Pump won't be our saviour. What can we do next?

[edit] Taran Rampersad

Sorry about the delay getting back to you. No problem... it looks like the article should stay.

[edit] Female Serial Killers

Dear Hansnesse, Thanks for the helpful suggestions re: serial killer articles. Michael Snyder

[edit] deleting

please do not delete additions without consensus on discussion page. it takes away from the point of allowing people to contribute on this website.

Thanks for the note, however Wikipedia is not the place for want ads, internet meme-based want ads or otherwise. Thanks, --Hansnesse 01:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

that is not a want ad, internet memme, or whatever the hell you call it. it is a contribution that is very helpful for people looking to see what "wanted" is. please stop. people like you are ruining this website.

You post is an internet meme, Safety Not Guaranteed. Please do continue to put it at Wanted. --Hansnesse 02:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

i beg to differ. it was an ad that truly was put in a newspaper and is very well known. i think it deserves to have a section about it. please tell me why it shouldnt.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a wanted board. If you continue to post ads, real or otherwise, it will be construed as vandalism. If you feel you material is a legitimate contribution, I strongly advise you to post material you suggest adding to the talk page, not the main article, since the matter is controversial. Thanks, --Hansnesse 02:09, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

the only controversy is you deleting my shit without asking.

User given blatent vandal warning --Hansnesse 02:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

and you are a fuckin douchebag.

safety not guaranteed.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jonathanbender (talk • contribs) .

[edit] You're welcome

... we try to guarantee safety on Wikipedia. ;-) Antandrus (talk) 02:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beanchainsaw

The small historical fact was moved to my user page, I will build a very extensive research on the name Vincenzo and will upload it in some months, I noticed there is no page on just the name :)

Thanks for everything.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/a/n/User%7EHansnesse_Archive_8742.html"