User talk:Russell E

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I find useful

Cheers, Sam [Spade] 03:23, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Hi Rkundalini, a belated welcome to wikipedia. I see you're doing/will be doing some major rewritting of polarization. That's great, it really needs it (the current article is a mishmash of about 5 people's attempts at explaining it). I do like your illustrations, also. (The only nitpick I have is that I think some of the mathematical treatment might be better off in Jones calculus or similar, but you do as you think best.) Good luck, and be bold! -- DrBob 18:14, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Entheogen

Good job at Entheogen! It's genuinely neutral and accurate. Wetman 00:51, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad we were able to converge on something mutually agreeable and neutral. Rkundalini 11:22, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Post-Roman christianity?

Hi, just wanted to query your edit to entheogen. My knowledge of history is terrible but from what I understand, e.g. from the Inquisition entry, is that the persecution of heresies began when Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire, and that nothing particular changed in the structure of the catholic church with the decline of the Empire, indeed even today it is still the "roman catholic church". So I don't really understand what you mean by your qualifying the setence with "post-Roman Christianity", would you mind explaining? Rkundalini 09:08, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Sorry I had totally overlooked your comment on that edit. I am glad you let it stand like that I guess its relatively obvious:"The use of entheogens (other than the Eucharist) in Europe was all but eliminated with the rise of post Roman Christianity". I am simply without much proof assuming that Jesus was indeed the crest of the psychadelic (entheogenic) 'Messias Wave'. The one who offered it to everybody at parties and healed with it. And of course I also continue to assume that the first followers of Jesus who had to do their Underground Movement where also really experienced. What do you think ? I further gather that it took thoes 400+ Years till the followers had forgotten to party really intensively and Rome was also at the end where then the puristic phase of Burning Books maybe implies the situation that edited sentence Kontextualizes? Togo 06:56, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Polarization

Hi there, I'm extremely grateful for your article on Polarization. But can you please explain what the theta's and a's in the formula given for the Jones vector denote. I'm completly new to this subject.

I have added a sentence of clarification, hope it helps. If the idea of complex numbers representing the amplitude and phase of a wave is new to you, perhaps see: complex number and Euler's formula (and maybe Phasor (electronics)). --Russell E 23:18, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Polarization is a useful entry! I do have a question/observation. I don't understand your reference to spinors -- aren't photons spin 1?

MattSzy  14:42, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
You are quite right. I don't know what I was thinking...! Rkundalini 15:03, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Wikisophia

Sorry for the inconvenience; we're back up and should have a CVS shortly. In the mean time, try wikipedia@sourceforge. Danenberg 11:33, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Tryptamine.png

The tryptamine image (Image:Tryptamine.png) on your user page is an uploaded file from me. I think your upload has been overwritten due to a wikipedia glitch and your original image has been lost. You may change the image and remove my text because the tryptamine article links to Image:Tryptamine_structure.png.

[edit] The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] Unverified images

Hi. You uploaded Image:Betacarboline.png but did not list any source and/or copyright information on the image description page. Please mark it either as GFDL or public domain. See Image copyright tags for more info. Please note that images without copyright information may be deleted in the future. Thanks. RedWolf 22:35, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Phenethyalmine.png

Image:Phenethyalmine.png seems to have had an error whilst uploading, as it is 0 bytes. It has been listed for deletion for this reason. IF you still have a copy of the image, could you please re-upload it, unless you have already done so with a different filename.
Thank you
Boffy b 19:42, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)

[edit] Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs

Hello, this article has been up for Featured Article Candidacy for some time. I noticed you were the one who added the text about the Single Convention to the Prohibition (drugs) article, and thought you might be interested. A few more votes are needed to reach consensus on this article. Thanks, 24.54.208.177 01:41, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Getting Psychotherapy into This Week's Improvement Drive

Hi there! I noticed that at one time or another you helped contribute to the article on Psychotherapy. As it stands this article could use a lot of help, and thus I've taken the liberty of trying to get it to be the focus of a week's improvement drive. All we need to get it for a week's worth of focus and improvement is enough votes, so go to Psychotherapy's vote page and help out this very needing article! JoeSmack (talk) 18:16, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Entheogen

Yikes, good catch! Isn't it a shame, though, that we're not "permitted" to wrap those little ToC boxes in text and that people like User:SimonP an Admin have the leisure and confidence to go through and revert them, one after the other big pointless blank spaces and all? I define vandalism as "intentional defacement" actually. --Wetman 07:14, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Heheh I didn't think you were into that crackpot stuff :). Re TOC: well guess his intention wasn't to deface, as in his view he's improving it. I don't see how having all that blank space is an improvement though! (But really we also shouldn't have to put hacky layout code in like that, the software should render the page without it by default ... I suppose this has already been discussed in great length on some community page I don't have time to read though!!) -- Rkundalini 13:07, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Reply (re Huxley article) from J. Russ

Hi, saw you have been making a series of improvements to the Aldous Huxley entry. I'd be interested in hearing what you think of the pair of comments I made down the bottom of Talk:Aldous Huxley. I think the article gives the wrong impression in a couple points but don't really consider myself qualified to make that judgement definitively. Rkundalini

Hi. I had a "New Messages" note when I logged on this morning, and as it was said to be from you - and related to the Aldous Huxley article - I followed the note you left (as copied, above). However, the A.H. "Talk" page didn't seem to show any new entries by yourself. I'll say, though,that the comments you have left in previous months all make good sense. Please clarify, if you like. Sorry if I'm missing something obvious.

You feel the article gives the wrong impression in a couple of points? That may very well be the case. Please specify. Maybe we can improve the article.

[edit] Rewrites

  • The History of Melbourne article was very poor. It consisted of my older article Foundation of Melbourne with a few paragraphs tacked on about later events. I have now written a proper article.
  • The Indigenous Australians was renamed from Australian Aborigine after a discussion at the Australian notice board page. I took the opportunity to split the article in two (the second article awaits writing) and write expanded material. The old article contained much good material, but also some unnecessary digressions, and it lacked coherence and structure. This is a chronic problem at Wikipedia, where many articles consist of agggregations of factoids added by many editors rather than coherent narratives. In my opinion all "big subject" articles benefit from periodic clean-outs and re-writes by single authors.
  • In both cases, a comparative reading of the current and previous versions will demonstrate what I have added and deleted.

Adam 08:15, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Changing username

Hi - Some time ago, you left a request on Wikipedia:Changing username. This facility is now up and running again. Are you still interested in changing your name? If so, please confirm at Wikipedia:Changing username. thanks, Warofdreams talk 13:31, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Your request has been completed. Regards — Dan | Talk 02:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Russell E 02:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Polarization pictures

Hey there. A while ago you uploaded:

  • Image:Circular polarization schematic.png
  • Image:Elliptical polarization schematic.png
  • Image:Linear polarization schematic.png

And put a PD tag on them. However, this tag is now obsolete, and since there is no discription I'm not sure how to retag them. I assume you created them, and intend to release them as PD? If so could you change them to {{PD-self}}? Or you can just state your intent here, or on my page, and I can retag them.

Anyway, thanks for your time! --Falcorian (talk) 07:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ellipticity and polarization

Hi Russell. In this edit from two years ago, to the polarization article, you asserted that ellipticity is used to describe polarization in preference to the more common geometrical concept of eccentricity, because the latter "is of limited physical meaning in the case of polarization." Another editor has questioned this assertion at Talk:Polarization#eccentricity/ellipticity. Your input to this discussion would be much appreciated.--Srleffler 03:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cabal Mediation

I'm mediating your cabal mediation case regarding the editing of the World Hunting Association page. Hop over there and take a look at what I've found, and add any comments or concerns you have. I've contacted the involved parties about this, so hopefully we can get this mediated. If not, we can just get the page protected. If you have any concerns that you would like to address with me, feel free to so on my talk page! Lauren 21:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Worldhunt

It is my opinion that a case like this should not be brought to WP:AIV, rather dispute resolution should be used. Basically an admin looking at AIV will not have the time to go back to decide if this is a content issue rather than a vandalism issue. If it is a content issue he'd rather move on to clear and block the next obvious vandal before he causes more damage. OTOH once the dispute resolution process has been completed you might have a case judgement to refer to.

I am leaving the entry up on AIV just in case someone passing has a different opinion. Agathoclea 10:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help.--Russell E 22:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Birefringence.svg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Birefringence.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Nv8200p talk 03:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image licensing problem

Could you please retag your images with a proper tag? I noticed that many of your images (which are easily found at this link) use deprecated {{PD}} tags. Could you please retag them with {{Pd-self}} if they are entirely from your work, and {{GFDL-no-disclaimers}} if the source code for generating the images came from Wikisophia? Wikisophia's contents are released under the GFDL without disclaimers, so you must tag images generated from their source code with {{GFDL-no-disclaimers}}. Tagging them with {{GFDL}} violates the GFDL because it requires you to preserve the attached disclaimers, and Wikisophia carries no disclaimers. Thanks.

The reason there is a problem is that the {{PD}} tag does not say anything about the image source. {{Pd-self}} implies that you created it. Jesse Viviano 22:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I was able to force the MediaWiki software to rerender your SVGs correctly by purging those pages, forcing the server to regenerate the image and the page. To do so, click the "edit this page" tab, and then replace the string "edit" in the url with the string "purge", and hit return. This will force the rerendering of the image, and the SVG renderer here is much more robust. Jesse Viviano 22:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)