User talk:Jaraalbe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 2 Beer by Country 3 Kitchen Explosives Rename 4 Taylor number 5 Metal minerals category 6 geodis 7 help 8 Wikipedia survey 9 CASREF print problems 10 ChemInfoBox 11 Stibine 12 Walcher of Lorraine 13 Thanks 14 III-V compounds 14.1 Rename 15 Santosh Yadav 16 Silicon dioxide 17 Joseph (Khazar) 18 Theta Beta Potata PUNK HOUSE Deletion Review 18.1 Theta Beta Potata 19 Cuthbert Ottaway 20 Refining Killed in action 21 Frederick Franklin 22 Freddy Spencer Chapman 23 Categories: Main & Sub 24 Caffaro 25 Hello 26 First Battle of Tapae - factual questions 27 Random Smiley Award 28 WikiProject France 29 Lewis de Bruges 30 People of Elizabethan Ireland

[edit] Welcome!

Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:38, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Hello!

I think I had an edit conflict with you on the Worcester article. Please check that all your recent edits have taken effect. Arcturus 18:43, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Beer by Country

I actually dont think Category:Beer by country is necessary. I have spent a lot of time sorting out classification in beer articles. And if you make changes in classification you must change all the articles not just a few of them, and discuss it first on the main beer page or the beer project page Wikipedia:WikiProject_Beer. I know some categories have x by nationality and similar, but this doesnt really fit into the classification guidelines, and the category is not yet unmangeably large. Justinc 13:27, 24 July 2005 (UTC) Also, articles should not appear in both a category and a subcategory, so everything in beer by country should have been removed from category beer. Justinc 13:28, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kitchen Explosives Rename

Category:Kitchen Explosives could be renamed to something like Homemade Explosives. helohe 08:03, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Taylor number

Thanks for the edits. Petwil 01:48, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Metal minerals category

Hi - just noticed your recent Category:Metal minerals and wondered about the rationale for it. Seems the vast majority of minerals have metals in their structure - or were you limiting your definition to base metals and precious metals or some such. Without further defining the cat is essentially redundant with Category:Minerals. I've not seen such a classification before - so am seeking clarification. Thanks, Vsmith 14:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] geodis

was created without consensus and is currently being phased out Tedernst | talk 23:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Just put the page in the category manually. Tedernst | talk 20:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] help

Someone keeps deleting niter.

[edit] Wikipedia survey

Hi. I'm doing a survey of Wikipedia editors as part of a class research project. It's quick, anonymous, and the data will be made available to the Wikipedia community later this month. Would you like to take part? More info here. Thanks! Nonplus 00:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CASREF print problems

Hi,

I notice you are adding CASREF templates to many articles. However there is a reason that WP:Chem does not use this template in the infobox- it causes print problems in Firefox and some other browsers. If you click on "Print this article" or do a print preview you'll see what I mean - the ref expands out so the box fills up much of the page. We have a strict policy of no external refs in the chembox. I recently reported this problem to the Drugs WikiProject, they were unaware of it previously.

If you can find a better way to do this, I'd like to hear. We've considered an inline ref to an endnote that would link to the NIST site, but that's a bit clunky. Any better ideas? Walkerma 21:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ChemInfoBox

I changed the Molar Mass section of your ChemInfoBox for Chemical ZnSe. You had listed 81.41 g/mol, but it is a known fact that the Molar Mass of any chemical is the sum of the Molar Masses of the constituent elements, so

Se Molar Atomic Mass = 78.963 g/mol Zn Molar Atomic Mass = 65.409 g/mol

The sum is :

                     144.452 g/mol

The NIST lists it at 144.35 g/mol,

so I went with the NIST listing instead.

I have seen that 81.41 listing on other websites, and I am just curious where you got your information from.

I can be reached at <A HREF=mailto:csdidier@mit.edu>csdidier@mit.edu</A>

Thankyou for the correction. I do not remember where it came from, but with hindsight it is obvious. Jaraalbe 11:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stibine

Hi Jaraalbe, I saw your comment that SbH3 has used as a fumigant. Seems surprising given its extreme instability and the greater avaiability and effectiveness of PH3 - do you have a source? --Smokefoot 13:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the SbH3 comment - I might have read it here: [1]. Perhaps a comment on fumigant effectiveness should be added to the article? Jaraalbe 19:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC) Thanks, I am surprised but your source is better than my non-source so I will fix the report. --Smokefoot 03:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Walcher of Lorraine

Hi there. I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Walcher of Lorraine, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Walcher of Lorraine. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

My reason is that your stub on Walcher of Lorraine duplicates a recently revised the article on Walcher of Malvern. I think you'll agree in doing away with the duplication. --SteveMcCluskey 20:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree - do away with the Walcher duplication. Jaraalbe 20:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC). Perhaps change to a redirect? 21:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for adding supportive citations in Hasan Prishtina article. ilir_pz 16:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] III-V compounds

I know that the names of GaAs, InAs, InSb etc. are formally Gallium(III) arsenide etc. However they are almost always known unambiguously as Gallium arsenside, indium antimonide etc. Therefore, your correct renaming of the articles is not useful. Less useful still is misnaming to Gallium(II) arsenide. Sorry to have to complain at this - but can you please check your recent edits. Jaraalbe 07:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Chemboxes are useful! Thanks. Jaraalbe 07:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the kudos, but it wasn't me who renamed the article, I've just been putting the template {{subst:chembox simple inorganic}} in a bunch of them. Maybe you confused my edits with those of another. mastodon 13:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rename

Hey, could do with your help on this: Talk:HgCdTe. The must be a reason why this article name bucks the trend... mastodon 19:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thank you.

Please, what is the problem? Jaraalbe 21:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought it was vandilisam. Jmclark911 21:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Santosh Yadav

You may withdraw unreference tag from article Santosh Yadav after having a look at reference added.Holywarrior 14:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you - I note that the tag has been removed. Jaraalbe 10:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Silicon dioxide

I wonder, what did you mean, when you added here [2] this:

'Silicon dioxide can be formed when silicon is exposed to oxygen (or air) at extremely high temperatures. This can occasionally happen naturally in fires, or in lightning strikes onto sand.'

I think that fires and lightnings are not a relevant example of reaction of silicon and oxygen (Talk: Silicon dioxide). --AB-fi 18:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph (Khazar)

I have removed the category "10th century deaths" from this article. While it is most likely that Joseph died in the 10th century, the date of his death is unknown. It is not outside the realm of possiblity that he lived into the 11th century. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 20:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Theta Beta Potata PUNK HOUSE Deletion Review

[edit] Theta Beta Potata

This article was first started by me and was deleted back in May '06. I was reading the punk house article and saw that the link for the TBP article was no longer red so I clicked on it and there was an article back up, started by another user. I dont know who started it because, it was deleted soon after I saw it. The decision made in the "Article for Deletion" debate should be reconsidered. The article is about a punk house not a fratenal organization. It seems that the debate, run by User:ChrisB and results were reported by User:Mailer Diablo. I will post this on their talk pages. This is the first time I have requested a deletion review so please let me know what else I need to do. If there is anything. I am on wikipedia frequently and I want to learn. Thanks. Xsxex 16:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cuthbert Ottaway

Thanks for taking the trouble to edit Cuthbert Ottaway. But could you explain why you have deleted three links to descriptions of early FA Cup Finals on the grounds that they are "blacklisted"? Mikedash 09:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

When I attempted to submits edits to Cuthbert Ottaway, Wikipedia said that links from a domain were blacklisted, and would not save the changes. When I removed the links, I could save the changes. I naively supposed that theere must be good reason for the "blacklisting". If you have more information about the blacklisting process and how useful it is, could you please inform me? Jaraalbe 06:16, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. Well, going here [3] it seems that the page on hometown.aol devoted to the 2006 World Cup is infested with spam, or spyware, so the whole domain has been blocked to prevent it spreading via Wikipedia. Or something. Nothig to do with the pages I'd linked to, but it looks like we'll have to do without them, which is a pain but certainly not your fault. Mikedash 07:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Refining Killed in action

Please revisit Gerald Archibald Arbuthnot. I have added detail. - Kittybrewster 21:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. re-visited Jaraalbe 21

45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

A remarkably modern-sounding name for something being applied to articles on people who've been dead for centuries. You really think it's appropriate for Harold Godwinson ? Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, It is appropriate as a temporary holding category, until a more appropriate sub-category is available (Category

Killed in battle / Monarchs killed in battle Anglo-Saxons killed in action ?) What would you find appropriate? Jaraalbe 19:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that rephrasing it is the answer. At many periods it would be of more use to record people who died in their beds, as it was considerably more unusual than dying by in war or by other sorts of violence. I can see that this is a useful category for modern wars, but I don't think it adds anything for the early modern period or before. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Ono Harunaga and other samurai warriors are not soldiers/officers of the Military of Japan and thus are not "military personnel". Please stop re-categorizing them as such. LordAmeth 11:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I accept your point and won't classify as Military of Japan. What would be a better desciption for these historical Japanese soldiers? Jaraalbe 13:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hm. Well, I'd suggest a "Category:Samurai killed in action" (or 'killed in battle'), which could go as a subcategory of "Pre-modern warriors killed in battle" or something like that. I'm not positive on what wording would be best to be most inclusive for warriors of other periods or places - European knights, etc. - but I'm sure something can be worked out. Thanks for your help. (If you'd like, we can certainly ask for help from the wider community at WP:MILHIST. I leave it in your capable hands.) LordAmeth 14:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Frederick Franklin

Hi: Jaraalbe, I was wondering where you found out that Franklin was KIA? If there is a source I didn't notice. It'd make my "wikitask" of improving unknown MOH winners... He clearly survived the intital action for which he was awarded the medal... so I'd appreciate your input... Cheers V. Joe 19:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

In categorising many killed in action, probably I have made a small number of mistakes. The year of death (1873) was close to the year of the MOH action (1871). Apologies Jaraalbe 16:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Freddy Spencer Chapman

Please look at the page you edited. I recently discovered it and have submitted a parallel biography by mistake. Please contact me to figure out how to merge these profiles. --Bofors40mm 17:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories: Main & Sub

Hello,

This message is in regards to the Article on Penleigh Boyd. I had added the Categories, Accidental deaths (which is the Main one) and the Category, Road Accident Victims (which is a sub of that). I realize that, at present, this is a controversial move at this point. However, this issue has been a source of consternation with me for some time in Wikipedia.

As it is set up now, The Article on Penleigh Boyd would not be included in the category list of accidental deaths. The encyclopedia does not have the capability of collating all the various subcategories into one master list. In another instance, Cancer deaths, if I wanted to list all of the persons in the encyclopedia who died from Cancer, I would have to call up each separate cancer type individually.

In another example, you are a researcher planning a major study of suicide; you are a clinician confronted with a patient with multiple suicide attempts; you are a student trying to learn the various aspects of the whole issue of suicide; or, you are just ghoulish – who cares. Where do you start? After you’ve read everything anyone’s ever theorized about the subject, you go to the real wealth of information: Case histories. You go to Wikipedia, and you find “Suicide”. In this main article you click on “Persons who have committed suicide: and, bam! You have a wealth of case histories to peruse. Now, if you want to focus on persons who have committed suicide by a specific method, say, by firearm, or by hanging, you click on Suicides by firearm, and again, Bam! You have it! But for both of these examples to work, the Category, Suicides must be entered in ALL of the articles, as well as the sub-category specifying the method.

Now, in another example, if you were doing a study of the impact of firearms on a society, you would first want all persons who died by firearm (of course, there may be some who would not want this complete list to be readily available, but that’s another issue for another time) you would follow the same process as with suicides.

What’s so complicated?

This “radical” notion of including both the Main & Sub-categories in the same Article has met with some resistance. What do you think?

Regards,

Michael David 18:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I will have to spend some time thinking about this one. However, categories are generally easier to navigate if small. I would prefer that your function of listing all "Cancer deaths" say were available by a generic function operating on the database as "List category and sub-categories entries to level {1,2,3...}". What do you think about that? Meanwhile I will think some more about it (other jobs allowing!). Jaraalbe 19:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I need to say at the outset that you are dealing with a somewhat computer challenged person here, so please be kind :-). If by "List category and sub-categories entries to level {1,2,3...}" do you mean a command that would present sublists? My only concern, being the lazy researcher that I am, is that the computer do as much of the grind work for me as it can. I would like to know more about your above alternative.

Regards,

Michael David 21:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Caffaro

Was there any particular reason why you put an {{unsourced}} tag on Caffaro di Rustico da Caschifellone? It doesn't contain anything that wouldn't qualify as common knowledge, I don't think. I've been meaning to expand it for some time and will of course list sources when I do, but everything there now is contained in other encylcopedias and so on. Was there a particular statement that troubled you--perhaps that his Latin was lousy (it was. . .)? Chick Bowen 06:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I did not mean to offend you - I personally believe that most people enter factual information in good faith - and no particular statement offended me. All articles in wikipedia are supposed to have sources. What might be common knowledge to you is not common knowledge to everyone. Unless a source is given people can not check the veracity of an article for themselves/ The unsourced tag also alerts all wikipedia editors monitoring the unsourced article categories: one editor might be prompted to find a source. Jaraalbe 07:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't offended, just curious--if there was something you objected to, I would have found a source or taken it out. I do think the statement "All articles in wikipedia are supposed to have sources" is a bit overly broad, though, and our policies say nothing of the sort, but rather (in a guideline) "Attribution is required for direct quotes and for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged." Most stubs like this one don't have sources. Look, I'm all for encouraging citation, but I don't think sources should be demanded willy-nilly; if there's a reason, seems to me, put the tag; if not, why bother? Nobody other than me is likely to source this article, after all, it being a rather obscure topic. Chick Bowen 08:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I would not have put the unsourced tag if there had been a relevant stub category assigned. However, I re-assert my opinion that verifiablity is crucial to the authority of a wikipedia article and to wikipedia as a whole. It is almost a truism that guide-lines tend to become mandatory with time (this is an independent observation to my main point!). Jaraalbe 08:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Regarding the article New Ash Green - you have edited, have you got any green idea about the origin of the name?

Eliko 23:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

None whatsoever, sorry. Jaraalbe 12:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First Battle of Tapae - factual questions

Please take a look at the discussion page for First Battle of Tapae, which you have worked on in the past - I am proposing that some of the content is incorrect and should be moved from the page. Please have a look at my comments and provide any cites you are aware of. Many Thanks - PocklingtonDan 12:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I have no source other than the wiki article. I suggest waiting to see if there are other responses. Jaraalbe 12:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Random Smiley Award

--TomasBat (Talk) 23:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject France

Hello! We are a group of editors working to improve the quality of France related articles. You look like someone who might be interested in joining us in the France WikiProject and so I thought I'd drop you a line and invite you! We'd love to have you in our project :-) STTW (talk) 22:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm very innocent concerning wikipedia projects and wikipedia internal politics. I think that I would prefer to converse on individual topics, but thanks very much for the invite. Jaraalbe 19:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lewis de Bruges

I'm dubious it is right to classify him as "Tudor people". All his friends were Yorkists & he seems not to have set foot in England after 1485. The Wars of the Roses category would be more appropriate I think. Johnbod 17:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Please re-classify in Category:People of the Wars of the Roses, if you think there is no connection with post 1485 England. Jaraalbe 19:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] People of Elizabethan Ireland

Hi Jaraalbe. Just noticed you've added some articles to this category, so thanks for that. Guessing that it's out of a commitment to making WP cohere, rather than an interest in the subject, I wonder could you give me a link that explains categorisation on WP and its significance? Maybe there's a WP essay on it?--Shtove 22:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I've picked up the 'art' of categorisation as I've gone along. I don't know any articles but my principles include the following: be logical, maintain consistency, and be flexible; split categories that are growing much beyond the 200 included on a page if a sensible division can be found; try to cross list sub-categories under at least two separate hierachies. I personally find categories very useful for navigating subjects. Glad to talk. Jaraalbe 22:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Time you wrote an essay then!--Shtove 22:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)