User talk:Hu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you start a chat, talk, or discussion, or make comments here, I will respond here and not on some other talk page. Similarly, if I post on your talk page, I'd generally prefer to continue the conversation there. Thus, we can avoid incomprehensible disjointed threads spread over several pages.
|
|---|
| 1: 2005-11-10; 2: 2006-02-08; 3: 2006-11-15; 4: 2006-12-23. |
[edit] Surface Brightness Fluctuation
Why switch to Harvard style references? I'm not used to using those and am curious as to what motivated the change? Thanks. WilliamKF 05:17, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for asking. I have looked into the issue carefully, and it is the only system on Wikipedia that meets all of these objectives:
- Briefest citation in-line with the text.
- Keeps the text clear and readable in the editing phase.
- No confusion about duplicate references. The <ref> system requires naming references and an editor may not notice a prior or later occurence of the same reference.
- Identifies the author and year inline.
- Familiar to researchers.
- Indicates currency or precedence of references.
- With the author's name inline, those familiar with the field will immediately recognize valid references.
- Works well as a reference section
- Allows the reference section to be alphabetized by author primarily and by year secondarily.
- The detailed information about the reference is in the reference section, not the text.
- Independent of the more common WP reference system, <ref>, which is modeled after footnotes and better suited to that purpose. The two systems can coexist beautifully.
I recommend it highly for all articles with a scientific or academic orientation. Explanations: Wikipedia:Harvard referencing, Template:Harvard reference. Hu 06:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- Could you help with doing Harvard references in this article: Planetary Nebula M2-9. In particular, how do I do a small cite so that the infobox does not get bloated? Also, is there an et al form for when there are many authors? Finally, what to do if there is no author like when it is a press release or a database query at SIMBAD? Thanks. WilliamKF 00:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I'll look into it right away. Hu 01:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I've edited the article. Thanks for introducing the Harvard reference system into that article. I used the standard reference system as footnotes to keep the infobox compact. Looks like you got the et al working. For SIMBAD, I fudged it by calling SIMBAD the author. Hu 02:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Could you look again? I've added notes a, b and wonder if that should be changed. Also, why the change to external links to use & instead of bullets? And, I thought style guide says no space before the footnote. Also, if you are willing to take a look at Protoplanetary nebula which I added Harvard too, that would be nice. Thanks again. WilliamKF 04:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Harvard references discussion
Please join this discussion: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomical objects#Citation_systems I think your input would be useful. WilliamKF 23:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I have responded there with my take on the advantages.[1] Thank you for inviting me. Hu 05:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cronisaur
Your tone suggests you believe I was acting in a disruptive fashion. I was not. I considered the article to fall under the 'hoax' category, which is not deletable under speedy criteria. We disagree on that - and I would have chimed in with a delete under the now closed AfD. Regards --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] AfD
I hope no big harm done. Happened the same with myself a couple of times. Since then I don't hit the "save" button on the tagged page until I finish the nomination. `'mikka 10:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
No harm done at all. I just thought I'd mention it. However, your advice seems like an excellent way to proceed, and I will adopt it. Thanks. Hu 10:29, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] notability - "Paco Nathan" page
Hi Hu,
You flagged the page Paco Nathan regarding notability.
I am the author. I was completing an entry to satisfy dangling links from existing pages in Wikipedia, including Boing Boing, Robby Garner, FringeWare Review, and Jon Lebkowsky - which had been on Wikipedia for a relatively long time without a destination page.
There are verifiable archives for FringeWare, such as on the Internet Archive, plus other works are archived in the published content of Wired, Whole Earth, O'Reilly, etc., as well as in the open source projects cited.
What other notability requirements need to be provided? Thanks. Ceteri 21:57, 26 December 2006
Please read Wikipedia:Biographies. Hu 22:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Image incorrectly deleted
You might want to ask KFP that, as he was the one who tagged it as such. —Pilotguy (ptt) 00:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Re: your edits [2], [3], [4] and numerous others involving the same image. The image Image:Benjamin West 005.jpg is not tagged. I don't understand you. I also checked his/her last 500 edits (since Nov. 29) and KFP has not touched that image in all that time. Hu 00:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
That's because the page has been deleted, per his request. The image still exists, but that's because it is linked from commons. —Pilotguy (ptt) 01:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't see the page deleted, the image is still there. I don't see any request recorded by KFP to have it deleted. If it has been deleted, it should be restored since it is a perfectly fine public domain image used in multiple articles. Hu 01:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] -phob-
Please don't add poorly referenced entries. Please see wikipedia policy about reliable sources. Please also read the section -phob-#Phobia lists and have a good laugh. Happy New Year! `'mikka 06:11, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
I only transferred one entry, acridophobia, in from an unnecessary web page. It has a reference, but you can disagree with its validity. I have no stake in the matter. Hu 06:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Warning
I advise you to self revert on science fiction, you've made 4 reverts within 24 hours on said page (a violation of WP:3RR) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 22:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
I have not made four reverts. There is no violation. I have made only two reverts (edit history of Science fiction article). I removed the tag, [5] you reverted, I removed it again (first revert),[6] another editor restored it, I removed it again (second revert).[7] It is not correct to claim [8] as the first edit of the chain because it was part of a reasonable edit restoring fit external links, but even if you were about to successfully argue that in some detail, it would mean only three reverts, so there is still no violation. Hu 22:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Partially reverting is still a reversion. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 23:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Please note, I have just delisted your account from WP:AIV (was a WP:3RR report and not obvious vandalism) you may be getting listed at WP:AN/3RR though. Thanks, — xaosflux Talk 22:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the action delisting and for letting me know about it. It was amusing to read that edit and see I had been promoted to admin! Hu 22:57, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] They were doing a minute by minute edit
And there were about three people there reverting. It's possible we just tripped over our reversions? HalfShadow 04:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
It's possible, but one way or another, probably a simple accident of reversion. I just thought I'd mention it to you. It all got sorted out in the end. Hu 04:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RE
OK then, I put the tag. However, it's just that I don't know where to mention to block the user. --esanchez, Camp Lazlo fan! 04:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Use Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV). Hu 04:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Partyserver
It is interesting that you have the opinion a game server needs to have a web site to be notable. Indeed, as you argued on the articles talk page "web sites [are] exceptionally cheap and easy to maintain". Does this make them more credible? It is even more intriguing that you first deleted the citation, then argued against the articles credibility. Surely a person who practises Zen and "programming" would know about a language called PHP and a Microsoft scripting technology called ASP, both of which make it impossible to link directly to the Game Monitor Partyserver pages. Perhaps you need to consider getting your facts straight before you choose to condemn an article to your personal opinion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.79.22.130 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
A web site does not make a server notable, but it is absurd to argue that a notable server would not have one. Even if one is not directly linked to the server, a server still benefits from a separate web site. This is proven by the efforts of partisans such as 210.79.22.130 to use Wikipedia as a substitute website, which is ina ppropriate. I am not surprised that Microsoft ASP scripting technology makes it difficult to link to the game server, though I doubt it is impossible. I'm on a server that uses real technology and has no difficulty at all linking both ways between the game server and the web site. I do have my facts straight, and the most important fact is that the web page when I last looked at it had not properly asserted or proven the notability of the game server. Finally, I suggest you read Wikipedia policy. Hu 08:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Heinlein: Gulf vs Friday
The "Friday" novel page currently says that the novel is "loosely related" to the story Gulf. I think that understates things considerably: Friday is in fact (in part) a careful point-by-point repudiation of everything proposed in Gulf:
- Joe Green in Gulf is taught ultra-rational thinking. Friday is taught totally intuitive thinking.
- Joe Green gives his life altruistically to save Earth civilization; Friday leaves Earth to its fate to settle down and mind her own selfish business.
- In Gulf, Kettlebelly states that evil organizations collapse when the head man is taken out, but that his organization would carry on without a hiccup without him. In Friday, Kettlebelly's complete organization shuts down totally within 24 hours of his death -- but evil keeps on trucking just fine.
And so forth and so forth: The more carefully you read the two in conjunction, the more clear it becomes that Heinlein was very deliberately repudiating in Friday -everything- that he proposed in Gulf. Ending, of course, with Kettlebelly insisting that Friday go anywhere -but- to join the "supermen". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.227.166.46 (talk) 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC).
An interesting analysis. Thank you. I suggest you propose it on the Talk pages of the two articles. Hu 09:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Harvard referencing
Hello Hu. I liked your posting at [9] about Harvard referencing. Can you offer a good example of an article using Harvard references, where everything (in your opinion) is done correctly? I am currently trying to heavily revise an article and have chosen to use Harvard, but don't know of any good existing articles to look at in case of questions. I know that there are official templates for Harvard but am unsure of their value, so haven't used any yet. Thanks. EdJohnston 06:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 64.131.21.148
I received a message from you on the 15th of November 2006 regarding the article on California. I have no idea what you're talking about. I have never edited a wikipedia entry in my life. This says I edited a page on the 15th of November, 2006? Well, I just got this computer brand new from Dell on the 9th of January 2007. Why don't you check your facts before accusing someone of vandalism. How rude. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.131.21.148 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Relax. You are using an anonymous IP address, probably dynamically assigned by your ISP. You can avoid this problem simply by registering a Wikipedia ID which you can keep permanently logged in. Or you can just realize that occasionally shared IP addresses will be abused by other people, so if you receive a message that doesn't apply to you, you can ignore it. As a long-time Wikipedia editor, I am sure of my facts, whereas you are not, which is excusable because you are a new user. You can check your IP address's edit history here: Special:Contributions/64.131.21.148. Editor ChillDoubt has responded on your talk page with similar information. Hu 20:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Non-standard capitalization of names
Hello, I saw your post at Talk:Bell hooks regarding the related capitalization issue. There is currently a similar, somewhat stagnating discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (capital letters)#Individual typographical choices for personal names, for which I am trying to render input by more editors. Hence I was wondering whether you would like to comment. Regards - Cyrus XIII 09:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] CfM: Science fiction short story collections
[edit] My compliments
I've just viewed some of your comments in some contentious debates, and I was impressed by your ability to project a calm, even temper, despite the vitriol of your colleagues. Way to keep sente! Somegeek 01:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. Hu 15:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] An RfC brought up by User:Lukas19 et al.
Hello, sorry to disturb but I thought you might be interested in commenting on this rfC: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/LSLM·Maunus· ·ƛ· 19:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
