User talk:IstvanWolf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, IstvanWolf, 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 Wikipedia Boot Camp, 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 more good links to help you get started:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Kukini 17:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] centripetal force/centrifugal force

Hi IstvanWolf, You wrote on my talk page:

Just for my own sanity, b/c this distinction between the two forces is maddening, is the centrifugal force simply the opposing component of the original motion vector? Is that essentially the name given to that force, since centripetal acc. pulls the object in and alters the original single vector into a composite one? I'm sure I'm not phrasing this properly, and if I had a diagram it'd be a lot easier. In fact, I think that a graphic is very much in order, as someone coming to this article with little knowledge of physics will be utterly confused by these discussions and formula. - IstvanWolf

The expression 'centrifugal force' is used in at least two different meanings, and I think several more. The two main meanings stand for two different and incompatible belief systems.

The current situation is that different wikipedia editors are trying hard to impose their belief system on the wikipedia article. As a consequence of that, the article is quite unreadable, and useless for anyone with little knowledge of physics. I don't see a solution. I have edited the centrifugal force article in the past, and I was pushing my own belief system, and others were pushing their belief system, and the article just becomes more and more unreadable and useless.

Generally, physics textbooks are written by a single person, or by a small group of closely collaborating authors. I guess that each textbook will use the expression 'centrifugal force' somewhat differently, depending on the preference of the author(s), but at least the expression is then used consistently within that textbook.

Because of the clashing belief systems, I don't think it is possible at all for wikipedia to have a comprehensible article about 'centrifugal force'. --Cleonis | Talk 07:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Maybe there are suitable diagrams. I like the following Java applets:
http://mensch.org/physlets/merry.html
http://mensch.org/physlets/inosc.html

I've tried to recreate the example of the merry-go-round with the following three animations that go together:
Image:Rotating fountain coriolis effect01.gif
Image:Rotating fountain coriolis effect02.gif
Image:Rotating fountain coriolis effect03.gif
But those animations were primarily designed to illustrate the coriolis term in the equation of motion for motion with respect to a rotating coordinate system. --Cleonis | Talk 08:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weight training

Thank you for your kind offer—and for mentioning it to me beforehand! I'm not sure what kind of material you were thinking of adding to this article, but it is by no means perfect, and could ceratinly do with expansion and improvement. One thing that I am particularly concerned about is the number (and quality) of the references, because there's a lot of articles being de-featured nowadays on that criteria alone. Also, there's a lot more that could be written about individual weight training exercises. But the article is getting about as long as it should reasonably be, so any big chunks of new material should probably go into subordinate articles. There are two already, but there's certainly scope for more. GeorgeStepanek\talk 07:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

That would be splendid! I've taken a few photos (shown in weight training exercises) that may be of use—I hope. GeorgeStepanek\talk 11:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ASP.NET

I reverted your recent changes to the wikilinks on this page. Many Wikipedia articles use the singular form as their official article name, e.g. "Programmer", "Web site"... there are additional redirect articles that capture the plural form and redirect the user to the singular form. When you see an article that contains a singular-form wikilink followed by an 's', e.g. [[Programmer]]s, the Mediawiki software is smart enough to include the trailing letter as part of the wikilink. We do this so that jumping through an unnecessary redirect is avoided, lowering the amount of work the servers need to do to show you the page you've asked for. Keep this in mind for future editing. Thanks! Warrens 05:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Writer's voice

Thanks for the help. Great rewrite by the way. EliasAlucard|Talk 20:36, 24 May, 2006 (UTC+1)

[edit] Cleanup Template

My bot, User:Alphachimpbot has just modified some of your cleanup templates. I just figured I would tell you... {{Cleanup|MONTH YEAR}} is not a valid template. Use {{Cleanup-date|MONTH YEAR}} instead. Just figured that I would tell you. --Alphachimp talk 16:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] XP-70

Hi IstvanWolf - are you still working on the XP-70 page? trolleymusic 04:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, the History Channel article/video was what I was looking at before I looked up XP-70 on wikipedia. Thanks for the link to XB-70 too, I'm still interested to read about the aircraft :) trolleymusic 02:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jellybeans

You have been awarded these Jelly Beans from -The Doctor- Please, enjoy them.
You have been awarded these Jelly Beans from -The Doctor- Please, enjoy them.

Here are some Jelly beans for you. I love jelly beans as they have sugar in them and most people love sugar. But on the other hand just receiving somthing from somone else just makes you happy and also just giving this to you makes me happy. I hope to spread the jelly beans all over Wikipedia, so here, you can have this lot. Please enjoy them. (I like the lime ones.)

Editors need a bit of a sugar high too.

An apple a day keeps -The Doctor- away. Or does it! (talk)(contribs) 02:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Angelo litrico.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Angelo litrico.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:05, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject

Hello, IstvanWolf. I noticed your contributions to Bowling-related articles, and was wondering if you would be interested in signing up to help create a Bowling WikiProject, with aims to improve bowling-related article coverage and expansion on Wikipedia. If so, please head over to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals and sign your name. Thanks. – Alex43223 T | C | E 18:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] request for comment on Hugh Hefner

Please take the time to go to Hugh Hefner's talkpage [1] and respond to the request for comment on what jerrygraf is trying to add that does not belong on Hugh Hefner's page, but belongs on PEI's, as well as the part I deleted is ment as a "controversial comment on the biography of a living person"Rogue Gremlin 04:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brick disambig style

Is it WP Style to not wikilink releavent items on disambig pages? (E.g., Terry Pratchet or role-playing.) I guess it seems like having each item have a single link would create, more clearly, a disambiguation for the term brick, without pointing to a whole bunch of other things.

But in that case, why leave in "moth" or "(bills)"?

Thanks,  — gogobera (talk) 21:57, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

See reply at my talk page. — gogobera (talk) 04:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sarah Sze

thanks for your work on Sarah Sze. Kingturtle (talk) 01:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Women's International Bowling Congress

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Women's International Bowling Congress, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Young American Bowling Alliance

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Young American Bowling Alliance, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bowling

Description 
This WikiProject would aim to improve the quality of and expand the coverage of bowling-related articles on Wikipedia.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. – Alex43223 T | C | E 18:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  2. Mearnhardtfan 20:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  3. IstvanWolf 22:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
  4. Useight 21:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  5. Howenstein115 14:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
  6. user:1bookfan --DJ 23:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
  • What kinds of topics are envisioned? History of bowling, famous bowlers, bowling leagues, what? --Lquilter (talk) 16:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
    • My guess would be the existing articles in the Category:Bowling and its subcategories, and any new articles that might be found to meet the extant notability guidelines. John Carter (talk) 17:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
      • The main things I envisioned in the project were, as aforementioned, improvement and expansion of articles in the category, as well as the creation of new articles with expanded coverage of current and previous professional bowlers and related topics. – Alex43223 T | C | E 07:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

So many people from one village! 18:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simply south (talk • contribs)

There is an existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Bowling] which could, frankly, use a lot of work. Please feel free to modify the page as you see fit. 18:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Bowling

This project is newly created. In fact, I'm the only member and any help would be, well, helpful, if you'd like to join. Useight (talk) 22:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:BOWLING Collaboration for May

May's Collaboration of the Month is Perfect game (bowling). I look forward to working with you to improve the article. Useight (talk) 22:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Angelo litrico.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Angelo litrico.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)