User talk:Omegatron/Archive02

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between March 2005 and July 2005.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Contents

[edit] To do?

You wrote:

"Waiting til an automated tool is made?"

There are automated and programmable tools for uploading stuff. I can help with that if necessary. Oleg Alexandrov 04:32, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yeah? I want to move all my images over: User:Omegatron/Gallery I didn't see any clear consensus on Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons, so I figured that stuff was still up in the air... - Omegatron 04:36, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
OK, now I see. You want more than just uploading stuff, you would like to move the images together with their history. That probably can't be easily done, and if yes, only by the admins. So, can't help you with that. :) Oleg Alexandrov 05:12, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I want to keep any information and previous images. I'm an admin, but not on the commons (yet). Does that help at all? - Omegatron 05:49, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
I guess not. One would need to know the fine details of how the Wikipedia software is implemented. I don't know how to do that. I thought you needed a lousy script to upload stuff from your hard drive. So, I got the wrong impression from seeing:
  • Upload my electrical images to the commons
    • Waiting til an automated tool is made?
on your page. Oleg Alexandrov 06:19, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mummy

On the mummy talk page you said you had the theory Egyptians preserved their dead in the hope future civilizations could ressurect them. In fact, they did it so their soul (which they needed in the afterlife) still had a body, which to them was essential. I'll be doing a massive update of the mummy article within the next week, and I'm hoping to include something about it.
Sincerely, Mgm|(talk) 14:55, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Major UI overhaul

MediaWiki needs a major UI overhaul. The problem is not limited to tables, but spans many constructs that relate articles to one another. I had not thought of tables as a similar area needing work, but it is really part of the same problem, similar to navigational templates: how to relate chunks of text to one another in a consistent fashion.

WP (and other MW projects) should be, if not unbreakable, at least usable without special training; a novice editor should not be more likely to break something than not. I believe relational database management tools need to be brought in. MW is based in part on MySQL (because it is open-source); I believe SQL in general is a dinosaur and insufficiently flexible. I don't expect to convert MW to Filemaker, but that is the kind of functional tool I want to see here.

Your concept of a table editor that is more complex than One Big Huge Edit Box is in line with my thoughts, and I'd like to invite you to collaborate on a MW proposal for major UI overhaul. — Xiong (talk) 13:55, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)

Let's have the discussion on one user Talk page or the other, not both. Okay? — Xiong (talk) 01:38, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)

[edit] Hydraulic/electric analogy

Hello,

You wrote:

"I think an article on the water/electric current analogy would be a good thing. I might start that...  :-)"

If you really plan to do this, may I suggest you a few things (I already wrote such a text in French, but not on Wikipedia):

  • it helps a lot understanding the difference between potential and voltage:
    • potential → altitude, or pressure;
    • voltage → difference in height between the top and the bottom of the water circuit (height of the water column), or difference of pressure between upstream and downstream;
  • parallel components can be compared with communicating vessels (same voltage~same difference of pressure) and with a flow derivation (Kirchhoff's current law);
  • resistance can be compared with friction (loss of charge, pressure drop):
    • resistance of the wire → friction in the pipe;
    • resistor → sinuous pipe such as heat exchanger;
  • load of an active component (e.g. charging accumulator, motor, electrolysis) can be compared with a watermill or a turbine;
    • back electromotive force → force used to make the turbine turn.

Cdang|write me 08:23, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds similar to the way I would present it. What do you think the article should be called? Yours is slightly different than what I would write, but don't worry, you can edit it!  :-) I might start working on it on User:Omegatron/water analogy. - Omegatron 15:30, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Water analogy to electricity

User:Omegatron/water analogy

I have not particular idea for the title. I'm used with French naming, and I think in English you have a bit different habits. Anyway, the title you propose is clear and thus conforms to Wikipedia "no surprise" principle. What is more important is to have the links at the right places and good categories.

I'll have a look (tomorrow?).

Concerning my diagrams, some are on commons. As they are all GFDL, you can upload them yourself as you need it.

Cdang|write me 15:51, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Looks good to me. (I made two little changes.) I would just split the article in two parts:
Cdang|write me 07:05, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)


[edit] your bots scare me

do you have a page explaining how your spell checking pseudo-bot works? - Omegatron 04:08, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

Got it, madman with a mad robot gone astray! :)
I actually do all the changes by hand. All the bot does, is (a) identify the pages with likely misspellings from a local copy of math articles of Wikipedia, (b) fetch fresh copies of those (c) use ispell to suggest changes, (d) apply the changes I decide, and (e) upload stuff back to wikipedia. So, I do only the crucial step, deciding if a word is trully misspelled, and what the spelling should be. So, if there is any mistake, it is all my fault, not the bot.
Other questions? :) Oleg Alexandrov 04:23, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I am glad that you are in the loop.  :-) Have you read through this stuff: User:Omegatron#Spell_checker? - Omegatron 04:31, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
I think what the page you pointed to says is that one should be careful with converting British to American English and vice-versa. No, I don't do that, I don't even bother to examine which variant shows up more often in an article. If you have other suggestions, please let me know. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov 05:11, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] electroencephalogram

Omegatron, would appreciate your response to my recent discusssion at electroencephalogram. Psydoc 07:49, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

I wonder whether you have observed my article edit and the response? Can you please advise me on the proper etiquite and a good solution on this article? It appears to me that someone with a grudge is set on slanting the discussion in the negative. Is there a way to invite a discussion without constantly swinging the article itself?Psydoc 03:45, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Down the memory hole

See User:Xiong/Minitrue

Now you're erasing my complaint that my complaint was erased?

FWIW, my Talk page is heavily edited and the reference you provide points to discussion. My obliterated (and for the moment, restored) complaint may be found at User:Xiong/Minitrue. — XiongImage:Xiong2char.pngtalk 05:59, 2005 Apr 10 (UTC)

[edit] Discuss not down the Memory Hole

Omegatron, the guy who posted the Harmonics_Theory page sent me an email poimnting out your comments about memory holes and pseudo science. Well said! If you wish to discuss the harmonics theory with me here or by email, you are most welcome. As a result of a 10+ year old list I have been called a crackpot by a number of physicists, and I always invite them to put forward scientific arguments. Two have done that the rest declined. The two that did both ended up agreeing that what I was doing was scientific, just well outside there previous area of knowledge. One was a particle physicist who agreed that I could have and did predict a new particle at 35 Mev which was subsequently found at KARMEN but is ignored by particle physicists. Best wishes User:RayTomes

[edit] 'Filter' reorganisation

Hi,

I've just come across the mess that is Filter and was planning to get stuck in, then noticed you'd just started a few edits. Do you have a Grand Plan for this? Shall I hold off?

--Ianharvey 18:51, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A Joke

And what's the problem in improving a Parody? I'm affraid you're the one that didn't got the joke. --Abu Badali 20:45, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tutorial formerly known as Prince

Do you want to come back to the table and discuss moving the tutorial with the absurdly long name? If so, I'm open. Discuss the move on the tutorial's Talk, please. My only objection was being tagged for the move by someone with no intention of helping to do the work. — Xiong熊talk 05:20, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)

[edit] Xiong

Would you be willing to co-certify an request for comment regarding Xiong's recent strings of odd behavior? I think he has a distictly different view of Wikipedia than most others, and perhaps an RFC would show that the feedback he gets from individuals is supported by many others. -- Netoholic @ 18:22, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)

Hmmm... I think he mostly just has grand ideas and needs to be shown that it isn't just a "secret conspiratorial cabal" that is opposing them. He needs to edit a little less boldly and relax a lot. If the request for comment will show him that a large majority of the wikipopulation disagrees with him, maybe he will turn his enthusiasm towards more productive endeavors.
He seems to have a personal vendetta against you, though, and frankly, I'm not sure where you rank on my list after all this meta-template nonsense, so I'm not sure about a co-certification... I'll read up on RFCs. I usually try to avoid this political stuff. - Omegatron 18:42, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
Ok. I've read about them. I will participate in an RFC, but I'm not ready to be the co-certifier. Let me know if you can't find someone else and I'll reconsider.
Maybe just try Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts about the meta-templates stuff for now? - Omegatron 19:37, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)


As one of the people who's tried to encourage this user to act more appropriately, I thought I'd let you know I have opened an RFC on him at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Xiong. In short, his actions have continued to be disruptive, especially his recent nomination of Wikipedia:Templates for deletion for deletion (see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Templates for deletion.

If you'll consider either certifying or supporting the summary, that would be appreciated. -- Netoholic @ 21:47, 2005 Apr 19 (UTC)

[edit] DC trip

Please list all your available dates in the table at Wikipedia:Meetup/Wikipedians of the East Coast field trip#Date. Thanks. --brian0918™ 18:34, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] OpenEEG

I took a look at their page and I'm glad you are advising them on hardware. Keep digging earnestly before they hook anything to people (or the poor animals either.)

I have had at least one client referred to me after they had treated themselves with neurofeedback, even obtaining much advise from an anonimous (!!!) perported clinician online. Getting them out of trouble was an arduous task.

To put it simply, the brain is emensely complex, and EEG operant conditioning is a very powerful intervention that permanently changes brain function, and thus probably micro-structure. EEG training can produce many undesired effects if applied with ignorance.

The old hackneyed phrase serves here: "I do this full time". I have 30 years of experience in neuropsychology and clinical psychology, study it constantly with other professionals, use numerous sophisticated diagnostics, and I find that often I must enter untested ground to solve a person's problem.

Partly the OpenEEG project entices me to hope for an open source contribution. But more salient is the serious concern I have for those who explore this unaware. I have met several professionals who set about treating themselves and the process went ugley. Sort of like the assessment of the man who represents himself in court: he has a fool for a client. Trouble is, we judge ourselves based on our perceived deviation from baseline, and some processes, like drugs and neurofeedback, move the baseline.

Be well. Psydoc 03:38, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

I see OpenEEG now has a wiki: http://wiki.asiaquake.org/ . The password is periodically posted to the OpenEEG mailing list. Should we start an OpenEEG article ? Several Wikipedia articles already refer to it ... --DavidCary 04:16, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Wikibooks

I have made you a sysop on en.wikibooks. Tuf-Kat 16:33, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] PfD

Keep after rehabilitation.  ;-) -- for that good laugh, I award you WikiThanks. — Xiong熊talk 19:28, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC)


[edit] DC Meetup will be May 7/8

The DC Meetup date has been finalized to May 7/8. Even if you can only come one of the days, that's still fine. Please watch this page for new details, which will be posted in the next couple days: Wikipedia:Meetup/Wikipedians of the East Coast field trip --brian0918™ 16:12, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Xiong

Hi there! Because the RFC about Xiong seemed to deal mainly on his disagreements with Netoholic, I thought it best to start a new RFC to see if people have comments on Xiong's behavior that do not relate to Netoholic. Please give your thoughts and/or opinion on that at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Xiong. Radiant_* 08:27, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Just to be clear, it was Radiant! who moved the RfC. I only re-copied the evidence as I assumed the move was fait accompli. I agree in retrospect that the move was probably un-necessary. -- FP ?? 01:26, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
I know. Did it seem like I was accusing you somewhere? - Omegatron 01:40, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
On the talk page Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Xiong 2 I got the impression you were addressing your comment to me. My mistake, forget about it. -- FP ?? 04:41, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pandeism

Hi, I need a metaphysical inclusionist to help keep Pandeism alive. First they said it lacked sources; then they panned the sources I found for being in blogs and such; then when I found an 1833 book by a noted religious historian discussing a different use of the term, they said, "well that's just one old book." I need a vote or two to keep the font of knowledge open! -- 8^D BD2412gab 17:29, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Windows Driver Model

Not sure if you're interested, but I've noted what WDM drivers are on the talk page. Haven't looked at the main article, but if you want to merge, go ahead. However, you'll need to reference the following:

Finnel, Lynn (2000). MCSE Exam 70-215, Microsoft Windows 2000 Server. Chapter 1, Introduction to Microsoft Windows 2000, pg 13-18. Microsoft Press. ISBN 1-57231-903-8.

HTH. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:22, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] IMNSHO

IMNSHO, naturally: sorry, I hadn't realised there was a link for it. HTH HAND --Phil | Talk 08:51, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] does xiong really watch *everyone's* talk page?

just testing. - Omegatron 03:35, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Yes. Test passed. Thank you. — Xiong熊talk* 13:26, 2005 May 5 (UTC)

[edit] Mentorship page

If we can't use the mentorship page User:Netoholic/Mentoring to discuss your behavior, then where shall we discuss it? - Omegatron 01:23, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

To behonest, I currently don't believe you have an interest in using that page except to attack me. Please email my mentors and discuss with them. It was meant for a constructive purpose, which you're not interested in. Sorry you misunderstand what the point of the mentorship is supposed to be. Please take a break and go edit some articles, and if you have any issue, then go to my mentors however you want. I ask that you stop using my status to attack or criticize me, and stop reverting me "on sight". If you take issue with an edit of mine, don't revert it until you've discussed on the appropriate talk page. Reverting without discussion is what I got in trouble for, and you're on that path. -- Netoholic @ 01:30, 2005 May 7 (UTC)

[edit] User:Netoholic/Mentoring

I hope you don't suspect my any comment on this page a support of a charge of stalking on your part, or anyone's. I hope I kept my comment most general. You and I may have our disagreements, but I bear no ill will. I did notice this user's concern, and as I recently had a similar concern, I thought to demonstrate my sympathy with the principle involved, without daring to judge the case. — Xiong熊talk* 06:52, 2005 May 7 (UTC)

[edit] Yeah

they are not... but if people do something wrong or something that's bad or something that I don't like, I'll kick their ass and will reverse it back. I and a couple of other guys are the major editors. So if a newbie come across with doing a shit on good work - we'll fuck him. Consider this as a kind of authority on this otherwise free material. Painbearer 12:49, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Netaholic

The reversion was totally valid. The wording of the final decision has to reflect the wording that the arbitrators voted on – otherwise it's simply not an accurate record of what we did. Adding in the mentoring page might give the impression that the arbitrators decided this page should be created and used - not the intended impression I'm sure, but it could look that way to someone coming across the page. Regards -- sannse (talk) 14:29, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ooohh

dude just leave me be. I'll do my best for my articles and will do as much as I can for these bands. I'm major uploader for these articles, I've proven myself for this and I think that I deserve more or less respect for my work. If I find something wrong in the articles I'll fix it foremost. So really, my job is to make the life better, instead of doing the shit. Your opinion is one of the few things that really don't matter at all to me. So rest in peace and stop bitchying on me on every point. 'Cause this won't result in making the articles better and will make me nervous, stopping me doing my job, as best as I can. Am I clear? Painbearer 20:35, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

Just FILL those EDIT SUMMARIES!!!!!!

Is that what you requested on your main page? :) I am more than happy to yell at you, and will continue yelling till you do as you're told! :)

Now, seriously. Try to do some RC patrol for a while, or have a long watchlist (as I do), and see how annoying it to see edits with no comment. You may say that one would need to look at the diff anyway. And I say, you are right, but having the edit summary at hand makes it easier to understand what the diff is about, or whether it corresponds to the edit summary.

Again, I yelled at you just because you asked for it. :) Oleg Alexandrov 00:19, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

I know how annoying it is! I am just lazy. Did you see the proposal for having it fill in automatically a few words from the diff, though? Mmmm... Automatic edit summaries. (Simulated for this edit) - Omegatron 00:27, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
There is one way to overcome this. As soon as you clicked on the "edit" tab, fill the edit summary. :) If you still feel like editing the article after that, go ahead. If not, you stop there. :)
I commented a bit at the village pump about the automated edit summary. I don't find that a very good idea; then people will try even less than now to put edit summaries. And an automated summary would miss the very point of it, which is, what did the editor want to say by doing this edit?
Wonder how you became an admin with this habit (or lack thereof). I would have voted you down in no time. :) Oleg Alexandrov 00:34, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 :-) Too late for you!! - Omegatron 00:59, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
At least one of us saw it coming. -- Netoholic @ 01:05, 2005 May 10 (UTC)
Heh. I didn't even notice that was you...
Too bad those 15 other people didn't predict what a horrible, stalking, belittling, power-abusing administrator I would become... - Omegatron 13:42, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
... and not even putting edit summaries.... :) Oleg Alexandrov 23:53, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Talk:Meme

The text removed from the page was archived, there is no need revert it. Joe D (t) 15:37, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Pong! See my user page for reply. --maru 00:47, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Ping! --maru 02:11, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Trinity anniversary

July 16, 2005 —two months from now—will be the 60th anniversary of the "Trinity" test. I'm trying to organize a few people into getting that article to featured quality before then, anticipating a lot of general news coverage and curious minds. I've noticed you doing good work on Manhattan Project-related articles in the past, so I thought I would see if you were interested in helping out. Please see the discussion at Talk:Trinity site for some of my further thoughts on what should be present in the article, and please feel free to share you own. Thanks! --Fastfission 19:07, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Peo's secrets to drawing diagrams

Hi Omegatron. I'm Peo from Commons (commons:User:Peo) and the danish Wikipedia (da:Bruger:Peo). I have posted a number of self-made diagrams at Commons, and on my talk page there, you asked about how I create these.
As I've stated on the info page for most, if not all, of my diagrams, I draw them using the "AutoShape" drawing tools in Microsoft Word 97. Similar features exists in both earlier and later versions of that application, and at my personal website there is a tutorial on using AutoShapes.
Word cannot export the drawings as a raster ("bitmap") image, so what I do is to "zoom" to the full 500% in Word, and take a screenshot. Anything beyond trivial tiny circuits takes several screenshots, which are then "stitched together" in a graphincs package.
Sounds cumbersome? Well, it is - but the results seem worth the efford imho. — Peo

[edit] Votes

I've just noticed that you've changed the vote tally from 59 to 58. A vote seems to have disappeared, but I can't check the history as the page with the history has been deleted. I have put in a request for the history to be undeleted. The vote should be 59, it was before the move, and it needs to be determined why it now isn't. --Silversmith 18:34, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

One of the votes was actually a comment, which someone else had just changed, without updating the tally. - Omegatron 18:59, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

here: [1]

[edit] You don't enjoy Linux anymore

I just suddenly saw that on your userpage, and I just had to know. →Iñgōlemo← talk 05:07, 2005 May 17 (UTC)

Nope.  :-) It has so much potential, but it annoys me sooooo much. I have a dual-boot, and I switch from one to the other for weeks at a time, depending which OS-specific things I am using, but I've been in XP only for the last few months. - Omegatron 13:04, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Harmonics Theory

So why do you believe that article should be kept? It is an article by User:RayTomes about an unreviewed theory from Ray Tomes with supporting citations to ray.tomes.biz, with controversial claims justified by "I, Ray Tomes, say so." It seems to be about as clear a case of original research as one could ask for. 22:08, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I mostly agree with you. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, I guess? I guess I think it should be included if a significant number of regular people or a few significant people have referred to it. Put it on VFD if you want. (Sorry I missed your post the first time.) - Omegatron 22:44, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Omegatron

Do you remember me? I'm from french wiki. I have just creat a log here to be able to fallow some pages here and add some contributions. I have add a getter diagram at getter page. Have a good week end. Oliviosu 20:03, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Leyden jar

Maybe you should post Talk:Leyden jar to Wikipedia:Reference desk to get a good discussion going. Julius Sumner Miller lied to me. —Josh Lee 19:12, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

You can if you want. I'm just going to be bold and move it to the article. I asked someone online who was demonstrating the dissectable jar, and they agreed that it was wrong. - Omegatron 19:46, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
That seems fine to me. —Josh Lee 23:24, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Propo-'s

Thanks for the catch. It's fixed! ℬastique▼talk 18:01, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shema

Ok, thanks (for the answer)
What are these for? - Omegatron 17:46, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, that's ok... I just made a mistake in copy/past, the new anwer was to look for an other help. bye Yug 15:48, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I've just noticed this, and this too. Zeimesu has made things unclear now.

Are you deriving from the original image, intending to use the GFDL or the original BSD license? (I need to ask since effectively uploading with an alternate license dual licenses the work).

Thanks, and sorry for this. Dysprosia 10:17, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I don't understand licensing. I usually just release my images as PD until I get around to learning the details someday. In this case I based my image off someone else's for consistency, so I want it under the closest to PD that I can get while still following the rules of the original work's license. I don't know what Zeimusu did. I should have just drawn it from scratch.  :-) - Omegatron 14:10, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks, and sorry again. If Zeimesu didn't confuse things I wouldn't have had to ask. I've made it clear that you're deriving from the BSD version (it's closest to PD). Dysprosia 02:11, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Binary prefixes

Well done on the Quantities templates fixing. I was at loss what to do there. Delicates 03:09, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Be Bold

Why did you revert me? And why does a reversion strike you as a minor change? JDG 15:06, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Just wanted you to take it to the talk page instead of revert warring a guideline. Looks like you've already done this. Thanks. - Omegatron 15:17, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
The thing is, my version had already been up there for five days with no objections and some support (on my User Talk) when Monicasdude (with no support) trundles in and carries on our earlier disputes with another undiscussed reversion. Don't you think Monicasdude would have the burden in this scenario? Would you consider reverting your revert? JDG 15:30, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Ok, I'll chalk it down to "bud of Monicasdude in all likelihood". JDG 01:22, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Huh? - Omegatron 01:55, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Testtesttest

  1. testing numbers. you can delete this if you want. or ask me and i will delete it - Omegatron

You can delete it, or I can WP:TFD it (or I can tag it as a speedy delete it as Patent nonsense since I'm not an admin).

BTW: I'm also using the SpellBound spell-checker, and as long as I don't try to spell-ckeck a large page on my slow computer, it works great (although I wish that they had an option for an All English dictionary that had every version of English spelling for dealing with pages that are a real mess as far as spelling choice, like the Chinatown article). BlankVerse ∅ 15:18, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well the spelling is supposed to be consistent throughout the article. You can download dictionaries for each variant. - Omegatron 17:50, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gasoline / Petrol article

Ed Poor abruptly deleted the ongoing debate/vote (which I then restored) and moved the article back to Gasoline. He implemented a recreation of his ridiculous template and encouraged users to alternate between "gasoline" and "petrol" on a whim, perhaps based upon whether the day is odd-numbered or even-numbered. (Elsewhere, he bragged about the fact that "we can switch [back and forth] whenever the mood strikes us.")

Obviously, he's out of control. We were so close to resolving this dispute once and for all, and he's deliberately attempting to stir things up again. Please lock the article's name before the edit war resumes. Thank you! —Lifeisunfair 03:51, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, but I recuse myself from using my powers to lock the article. I've never locked an article before, except for my own tests, and I'm not going to start with one that I am so entrenched with. We need to get some outside help. - Omegatron 12:55, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
Understood. Do you know of an uninvolved admin whom we can enlist promptly? —Lifeisunfair 13:01, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I would say Wikipedia:Mediation Committee, but seems we've already been visited by one of them... - Omegatron 13:11, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Metatemplate guideline

Go to the page, open the search window (control-F) and type 'guideline'. David Gerard makes the main point that it is a technical issue and that Jamesday (our main developer) endorses it. Most things are set by community but some can be imposed by our technical staff. And remember that guidelines aren't set in stone. Radiant_>|< 13:22, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, this should be applied in most cases, and TFD consensus does reflect that (e.g. the recent template that was used for template style...) Something doesn't become a guideline because it has (or has not) a guideline tag on it. Generally, they become such because of a consensual discussion. But if one of the Powers That Be (such as Jamesday or Jimbo) says that something is a definite bad idea, it is a de facto guideline. Similarly, the ArbCom doesn't care whether something has a policy tag on it or not, when they're deciding to enforce something it's de facto policy or guideline. Radiant_>|< 13:49, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • They don't care, but we should. At any rate, it is not a proposal, since it doesn't propose anything really. I've reclassified it as a style and how-to document, that should help. Radiant_>|< 14:05, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spectrogram image

Hi,
I came upon your Image:Spectrogram of violin.png. In the spectrogram article, you say that the intensity axis is logarithmic. There isn't an explicit intensity axis, though. I've watchlisted your talk page; you can reply right here. --Smack (talk) 22:41, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ah. I meant the scaling of the brightness values is logarithmic, corresponding to decibels. - Omegatron 23:13, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kilobyte

Please see Talk:Kilobyte. – Smyth\talk 13:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] krill

hallo and thank you for your help - I uploaded it in a hurry - you have cool contributions - take care Uwe Kils Image:heringmini.jpg 19:18, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] See also

Thanks. - Omegatron 01:07, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] COM:FPC

I have nominated commons:Image:Hilbert_transform.png for Commons "Featured Picture" status LoopZilla 2005-07-02 19:54:31 (UTC)

Awesome! Did you see commons:Image:Weighting curves.png?
They certainly took me a lot of time and work to figure out... But now I can make similar graphs relatively easily using the same commands. - Omegatron July 2, 2005 19:57 (UTC)

[edit] Bit rate

Response on Talk:Bit rate. – Smyth\talk 2 July 2005 20:40 (UTC)

[edit] COM:FPC again

I have now nominated the Weighting Curves....

See [2]

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../o/m/e/User_talk%7EOmegatron_Archive02_cc99.html"