User talk:Lambyuk
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] I reversed your large excision to "Coalition of the willing"
I reversed your large excision to "Coalition of the willing". It might seem obvious -- to you -- that your excision removed blatantly biased POV. That is a mistake. If one looks at your edit, without really reading it, what one sees is a large excision, with no justification to back it up. Any vandal could cite your example to justify their large excisions.
I am sure you are sincere. But we have to explain, in detail, why what we are removing expresses a biased POV, to show that our excision is not representatitve of a biased POV. We can be sincere in excising large blocks of other's text, because they represent a biased POV, and be unconscious, unaware, that we are the one whose POV is biased. Others who read the record, and the discussion, deserve to have had us make our case for the excision, so they can decide who is or isn't showing bias. Remember, they make lack the background we have on the topic, and need an explanation of something that seems "obvious". -- Geo Swan 16:38, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hello from Mike1024
Hi there Lamby
Just though I'd drop you a note after your post on my user talk page. Hello there!
I'm currently at the University of Warwick doing electronic engineering - what about you?
Cheers,
Mike1024 (t/c) 23:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 0.999... + 0.111... = ...
The problem with your proof is that 0.999... + 0.111... does not equal 1. For it to equal 1, you'd have to be adding 0.999... and 0.000...1 (decimal point followed by an infinite sequence of zeros followed by 1). So you've really proven that 0.000...1 equals 0, which, while still interesting, is somewhat less absurd. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 02:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- ROFL. Errrrr, it's a spoof of the Proof that 0.999... equals 1 talk page. I'm sorry you fell for it. ;) Lambyuk 02:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] AVP
Please do not erase information from pages, it is considered vandalism. That information is accurate. First, if you are going to put 80 million as it's profit that you should specify that it was just in the US, the worldwide take is more accurate. Second, sequel is no longer rumored, because a release date has been set. Bignole 04:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- I actually don't know why I used bullets, I don't usually use them. Either way..I can't access Superherohype at work, if you can be my guest. The link to the page is on the front page of the site. All you have to do is look to the left where the "updated" information is and you will see it there. Bignole 12:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Michael Romeo, guitarist, playing live.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Michael Romeo, guitarist, playing live.png. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ilse@ 17:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Boîte Diabolique
I've nominated Boîte Diabolique, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Boîte Diabolique satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boîte Diabolique and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Boîte Diabolique during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Psychonaut 14:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)