User talk:Gnusmas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Gnusmas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  FloNight talk 11:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] fmt ref

Hi, thanks for fomatting the NHS ref for me - I will learn how!

Rgds

Springnuts 21:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Elk

The decsion to divide the articles Elk and Red Deer was decided recently due to new DNA evidence and long discussions on the article talk page at Talk:Red Deer. The new Elk article is fine, and I am going to be working on the Red Deer article to make it species specific.--MONGO 08:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

If you could lets keep the discussion on this move at Tal:Red Deer so it's all in one place. I'll watch that article as always.--MONGO 09:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem...it's a collaborative wiki and I think the new title will work out fine. Still fixing the links and will make further adjustments ot each article so they are species specific. In time, the articles will end up looking fairly different as new contributors work on them.--MONGO 09:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about that...good catch you did here--MONGO 22:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks

Thanks Gnusmas for inserting the references into my Pacemaker History edits. Hopefully I'll learn how to use html templates before long.RegardsGeoffrey Wickham 21:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Serial comma

Hi Gnusmas,

I enjoyed reading the serial comma discussion. I didn't want to post there since things seem to have calmed down but I did want to leave my impression of what may have initiated the confusion. Although it is explicit on the discussion page, the "To my mother, Ayn Rand, and God" example in the main article does not specifically mention that the ambiguity may arise from the commas potentially being either parenthetical or serial. Perhaps it seems obvious, but don't forget the Oxford-colored glasses some of us look through :-)

Best,

Jeffery.griffith 19:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arrhythmia Alliance

When someone directly affiliated with a group adds external links to multiple articles for the sake of promoting that group, I think it's fair to call it external link spam. In addition, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond which the article itself would provide if it were a featured article is considered a link to normally to be avoided. Best, MoodyGroove 15:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove

I defer to your judgment in this matter. Thank you for the reply. Best, MoodyGroove 15:53, 28 April 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove

[edit] Nicholas Beale

You voted on this article's AFD previously. User:NBeale complained that the AFD was closed too early, and so it was reopened. Please leave your opinion at the second nomination for AFD. — BRIAN0918 • 2007-05-05 17:09Z

[edit] Why can't you face truth and why do you keep reverting?

Hi Gnusmas. You seem to be another example of an Atheist who can't face basic truths, and prefers serial reverting. Dan Dennett clearly states "Some people are sure that the world would be a better place without religion. I am not persuaded, because I cannot yet characterise anything that could replace it in the hearts of most human beings." but you keep reverting the properly refed and utterly incontrovertable statement in the article that "However Dennett is not persuaded that the world would be a better place without religion, because he cannot yet characterise anything that could replace it in the hearts of most human beings[1]". WikiPedia is not about Mob Rule, so your reverting clearly objective facts is not helpful. To say to another serial reverter "good work" rather emphasises the point about "mob rule" it seems to me. If there is something amiss with the statement, why not improve it rather than try to hide it? NBeale 22:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

The links I removed on cardiomyopathy and myocardial infarction were both added by Danjeffers (talk · contribs) who has previously been adding lots of links to lots of articles. On closer review, the NHLBI pages contain practically the same information as the Wikipedia articles in question, but completely lack sources. I would not support re-adding them unless I can be convinced of their usefulness. JFW | T@lk 23:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NNT

What dis you think of the BW explanation of NNT I had in the reference section? I think its the best explanation I have seen in plain english. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)