User talk:Ghw777

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Ghw777, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 13:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Austria

Would you be interested in having a WikiProject about Austria? If you are interested you can sign up here. Kingjeff 00:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] [citation needed] on Global warming controversy

Hi! You have added a {{fact}} tag to global warming controversy. Can you elaborate a bit? The fact that there is a consensus is reflected in the various reports and comments by scientific organizations, as well as by the Oreskes analysis. But the paragraph in question deals with the arguments of AGW theory supporters. I woud think the fact that they claim consensus is common knowledge and not challenged by anybody... --Stephan Schulz 08:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seawater pH

Hi Ghw. Further to our discussion over at Talk:Ocean acidification, I've written some text about the various pH scales used in oceanography. You can see this here. My intention is to move it into the pH article itself once people have had a chance to look at it and/or edit it. I'd be grateful if you, as a chemist, could have a look to make sure I've not made any terrible gaffes. Cheers, --Plumbago 13:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Actually, I've now moved the text into the pH article itself. I think it's OK, but would appreciate your remarks on it if you've the time. Cheers, --Plumbago 08:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] {{reflist|X}} -> {{reflist|1}}

Hi Ghw777! I'm a bit concerned about your edits reformatting the references into one column - in fact, I'm more concerned about the edit summary than the act (though others may differ). It is certainly not impossible to properly print the multi-column version. It works fine with Safari 3 on MacOS-X (it just ignores the request for multi-columns in the print output - sneaky!). I can see what you mean if I try to print in Firefox, but that is a problem of the browser, not the Wikipedia page. For HTML, it's the responsibility of the formatting program to make sure it gives a decent result. Pragmatically, maybe the best solution would be see if reflist can be changed to ignore that parameter in the print view? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Stephan, IMHO are multiple-column formatted references need- and senseless. It makes the articles more difficult to read, it does not save space and it causes problems on several systems (come on, don't try to impress me with your mac). I use a rather narrow layout of my browser and so all I see are two 2 inch wide columns... There should not be any mandatory "special formattings" in wikipedia by default. The only way could be something that the users which want multiple columns could set in their personal preferences. Multi-column formatting is also a violation of the WP-principle Wikipedia:Accessibility. Personal preferences should not be mandatory for all readers of WP. What are the advantages of this formatting (esp, when they are perverted like 3- or 4-column layout (on my 3200px widescreen desktop I could prefer 8-column layout, why not use that one? reflist is kind op personal preferences and should be configured in everyones personal setup, not on global scale. -- ghw (talk) 10:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)