User talk:Jrockley/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome!

Hello, Jrockley, 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:Questions, 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!  JFW | T@lk 01:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

Adminship and such

Glad you don't have meningitis. I couldn't email you benzylpenicillin and even then you may have had difficulty administering it to yourself.

People become administrators after having spent a few months (3-4 usually) contributing, and having made typically about 3000 edits. These are coarse indicators, but typify a user who gets voted admin in an election procedure. An administrator can protect and delete pages, and has an added functionality that helps revert articles in case of vandalism; Wikipedia:Administrators lists more work.

I would recommend you seek out an area of your own interest and expertise (e.g. your work or hobbies, other interests) and start contributing there. I'd avoid controversial articles; the pitch can become quite deafening there and there are casualties (i.e. people leaving Wikipedia because they're upset) on those pages. JFW | T@lk 01:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Plague

In response to your question:

Wasn't there a third outbreak of plague, just before the great fire of london in 1666? I don't know whether it was bubonic or pnemonic though. Perhaps someone should look it up and verify, then add to the article? - Jack (talk) 01:36, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

The episode of plague in London, see Great Plague, was one of the last outbreaks associated with the Black Death pandemic. There were several "last gasps" of the disease in Europe during that later period. The disease spottily reappeared in the 18th century as part of the international contagion known as the Third Pandemic. What kind of information about this particular outbreak would you like to see in the Pandemic article? And, welcome to Wikipedia. Look forward to working with you. WBardwin 22:03, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Espo

Hi, I noticed your message on Kwamikagami's page. I'd say it's probably worth learning too; there is the problem of actually having to seek someone out to use it as opposed to other languages where the chance of stumbling onto someone who speaks it is higher, but on the other hand there's the free travel and whatnot and as a first second language it could help prepare you for another one. Plus they started the tv channel last month.

BTW, as for national languages I find Swedish / Norwegian / Danish to be the easiest. Verbs conjugate all in one way which is really nice at the beginning. Mithridates 15:36, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Vista

Paul says that the way it is now is correct. Who says you are required by law to get the N edition? It is not that different from the original edition. I think the only thing the law requires is that those editions are available. I don't know why you wouldn't but the regular edition instead of the N version. Just buy the "Home Premium". — Alex 04:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Determining IP address

Depends what you run. You could just type in ipconfig /all via a Windows 2000, Windows XP or Windows NT 4 system's command prompt. On a Windows 98 or Windows Me system type in winipcfg, then select your interface. On a Linux system, type in ifconfig. I think BSD systems use some sort of netstat command - I suggest you check the man page if that's what you are using (though if you need to, then you maybe should consider something other than BSD...). HTH.

There are other techniques, like doing a traceroute and see what the initial IP address is on the first hop. Give me buzz if you need to. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Copyrights

Using the HowStuffWorks site as a source is perfectly reasonable as long as you list it as a source. Otherwise writing an encyclopedia would be a real nightmare. Still, HSW must itself rely on primary sources. I tend to make attempts at identifying those sources, but then again these may be very technical even for the initiated reader.

Which image did you "borrow"? If you took it from their site and uploaded it here it will qualify as a copyright violation. If you drew it yourself the problems are much smaller. JFW | T@lk 19:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

There must be a way to contact the author of the material you're referring to. JFW | T@lk 19:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Binding_energy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Binding_energy.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. --OrphanBot 09:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Some of your ITER edits are redundant

Hello,

You have made some competent additions to the ITER article, which is always welcome, but i also think that some of the information added is redundant, as it is not specific the reactor itself, e.g. "Fusion requires temperatures about 100,000,000 Kelvin.". This is a statement of how fusion works in GENERAL, which becomes 'assumed knowledge' once a reader reads beyond the "fusion power" link.

I hope you understand my criticism. If you don't, please discuss with me. I plan to delete the information that is not SPECIFIC or UNIQUE to ITER in a few days time.

i see your point, infomation repeated form other articles is somewhat redundant. however, i never intended to preach the complex workings of a fusion reactor. i feel what i added is a brief summary of that, aimed at users without an in-depth technical understanding of fusion power. please edit away; it is far from perfect, but please dont remove most of what i put.
the reason i added what i did is because before i began, almost all of the article concerned the political impact of the experiment, and very little of what it actually is supposed to do, and how it does it. it is an experiment in physics, not politics.
on another note, i am a bit rubbish with copyrights. could you please help me verify that i have not broken the law in uploading this picture from this site.
thanks, - Jack (talk) 20:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess we *could* start a flame war over it... but you know what they say about arguing on the internet...So I hope we can leave it at this:
Basically the issue is; A: does one add information for convenience of *some* readers who will read the whole article, saving said readers from a click to a linked article OR B: Keep information absolutely specific (i.e. not general information) so as to keep the article as lean as possible so as not to overwhelm readers with excess, meandering and diverging information because someone thought it would be a "good idea" to add context to the article?
Just to ram the message home, here is an example: If i were to read the article about how planet earth formed in the solar system, do I also need to read about the formation of the universe in the same article? Of course not, because a link to that information is far more appropriate, because those who *want* to read about that can follow the link. Those who dont shouldn't have to hunt for the information they want in a bloated article, or even worse, decide not to read at all because the article looks too long and too technical (although it is quite acceptable to have techical data *specific* to ITER in the article). If someone wants that technical information on the basic operation principles of nuclear tokomak fusion they can follow the relavant link, otherwise, lets not give them nightmares of math an physics classes.
Now, I hope we can move forward in making this article as accesible to everyone as it can be.
--distantbody 02:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Brody.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Brody.JPG. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. --OrphanBot 07:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Future evolution of humans

Hi. Thanks for the note on my Talk. While I'd be interested in reading your paper, I agree with your own evaluation that it's very speculative. I think what would be most useful would be quotes from your references.

Anyway, the page has been nominated for deletion, so it's probably best to hold off for a bit and see how that turns out. Be sure to visit the deletion discussion page and cast your vote/voice your opinion! RJCraig 01:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Picture

Image:Hydrogen fuel cycle.PNG can't be in the public domain because the Image:2000 Ford Taurus.jpg image is fairuse and Image:Hoover dam.jpg is GFDL. Could you recreate the graphic using only PD pictures (or license the whole thing into the GFDL and just get rid of the fairuse picture)? The copyright information right now is incorrect, which is a shame because it is a good diagram. Broken S 19:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Templates

No permission is required to create templates. Simply start Template:Fusion power and copy the contents of Template:Phase of matter there, after which you can replace the links with your preferred ones. More elaborate designs exist, such as in {{Blood}}.

When done, you can simply transclude the template by using {{fusion power}} at the bottom of the relevant pages. JFW | T@lk 05:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Magnetic confinement fusion

So I've been seeing this: "Magnetic confinement further compresses the plasma, increasing the energy of nuclear collisions". I'm guessing you got this idea from HowStuffWorks. Their statement is misleading, and I sent them a correction. First off, a typical fusion plasma has 10^20 ions per cubic meter. That's one millionth the density of air; I wouldn't consider that to be compression. What you really need for fusion is kinetic energy, and if you've studied the Boltzmann distribution, you know that there's a 'T' in that expression.

The magnetic field's purpose is to "bottle" the plasma, though its actual effectiveness has been described as "wrapping jello in string". Which is probably why the weaker term 'confinement' is used, but that's real life. I hope my explanation was understandable; feel free to ask me any questions you've got on this subject, and I'll answer them as best I can. - mako 22:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Vinyl.jpg

Hello Jrockley, how are you? First of all, sorry for my English, it's not as good as I want, but I hope it will improve with time. I'm a spanish wikipedist and I want to ask you if you could upload this image into commons. I've tried to do it by myself, noticing you as the creator of the work, but I don't know how exactly I have to license it, since you are the author. The correct one, as far as Im concerned, would be Own work, all rights released (Public domain), wouldn't it? But, Im not the author. On the other hand it is not license as a GNU-License (or is it?) and the other options (I mean the public domain ones) don't fit the correct license (at least that's what I think ... xD). So, again, could you upload this image into commons so all the community will be able to use it in articles, or at least, do you know what's the correct license for your creation? (so I could upload it). Thanks in advance :) Lasneyx'nid Iliah :- Open North -:

Image Tagging for Image:Brody_Dalle.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Brody_Dalle.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 11:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

RISUG → STDs

Your addition to RISUG is just speculation as it's currently written. Can you provide a reference of someone who says that? — Omegatron 00:35, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

yes, i suppose it is just speculation, so i can't provide a source. although it may be just speculation; i feel it is a logical assumption. what with me being a male, and a lot of my friends being male, i know that if an easy, convenient method was avaidable that only needed thinking about once a decade, i would not find myself to be the biggest condom-fan the world has ever seen. the prospect of a reliable method such as this that does not "interrupt the thowes of passion" would be a much more convincing argument at the time than "condoms protect against diseases". it may be my opinion, but i know i am not alone in thinking it. on the other hand if your quarrel is just with the wording, feel free to edit away! - Jack (talk) 13:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Organic Reaction

Although I cannot physically perform this reaction, a grignard reaction with oxalyl chloride should be fast, although you'd need 2 eq. bromobenzene. Sidar 02:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Fullerite & ultrahard fullerite article merge

Thanks for the Heads up on that, As long as there are accurate articles about fullerenes and fullerites on Wikipedia in as many languages as possible, I'm happy.

III-V compounds

I know that the names of GaAs, InAs, InSb etc. are formally Gallium(III) arsenide etc. However they are almost always known unambiguously as Gallium arsenside, indium antimonide etc. Therefore, your correct renaming of the articles is not useful. Less useful still is misnaming to Gallium(II) arsenide. Sorry to have to complain at this - but can you please check your recent edits. Jaraalbe 07:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Chemboxes are useful! Thanks. Jaraalbe 07:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the kudos, but it wasn't me who renamed the article, I've just been putting the template {{subst:chembox simple inorganic}} in a bunch of them. Maybe you confused my edits with those of another. - Jack (talk) 13:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Sig

Go to your preferences and set "raw signature" to yes, then add whatever HTML markup you want.

Alternatively, you can create a subpage with all the HTML for your sig and set your prefences (with "raw sig" on again) to have your signature as {{User:Jrockley/sig}}. Hope that helps.Voice-of-All 20:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Testing - Jack (talk) 21:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Awesome - Jack (talk) 21:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

New Messages

Please do not add a fake new messages bar to the article practical joke --GeorgeMoney (talk) (Help Me Improve!) 23:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

(More...)

The word (More...) links to Deconstructivism. Shouldn't it go to Right whale? --Cam 00:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

You're right it does in IE. However, slightly bigger worry that in the Firefox browser the whole featured article section refers to deconstructivism, with no mention of todays actual featured article at all! Something is very wrong here - Jack (talk) 01:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
That's not true. You may have to press ctrl + f5 or ctrl + shift + r to override your browser's cache. joturner 02:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Water

I notice you've made a lot of changes to the article on Water, including adding the chemical infobox. Now, I'm not saying these edits are bad... but you do realize, don't you, that there is a seperate article on the chemical properties of water? And that that other article Water (molecule) has the infobox you added? And that the infobox in Water (molecule) is more complete then the one you added to Water? ONUnicorn 18:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing. Yeah, my edits may look bad at the moment, but I'm halfway through. The article when I found it was in a terrible state, it didn't flow at all. Just trying to put some order here. And about the chembox, its only a mini one (see Wikipedia:Chemical_infobox) and it had been requested on the talk page - - Jack (talk) 18:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

PACER diagram

Hey, you seem to be the expert at this, I've seen some of your diagrams and I'm very impressed. Could you create a diagram for the PACER article. Its all about using nuclear fusion as an energy source by detonating fusion bombs under ground. It doesn't work, sadly, but seems your sort of thing. You up for it? - Jack (talk) 20:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I've been trying to piece over exactly what the PACER system would look like. I'm having a hard time figuring it out from the description though. Is the idea just that you use a nuclear weapon to heat up some sort of intermediary fluid (i.e. molten salt), which you then use to boil steam and run a turbine? --Fastfission 14:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I must confess, I don't really know. I kinda hoped you would, so I could understand it better. Even a google image search won't help! - Jack (talk) 14:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Haha, ok. I looked at the Garwin book and it didn't really help much, but I'll try checking out the Teller book which first proposes this and see what he says. Piecing together bits and pieces of things, I have somewhat of an idea of what it might look like, but I'm not very confident in my assessment as it is. --Fastfission 22:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Template ChemicalSources

Hi Jack,

Thanks for working on Iron(II) hydroxide, I hope the rest of the chembox will be filled in in time. But I have reverted a part of your edit, the subst of the template:ChemicalSources. I'd like to keep the template on the page, so not being subst'ed. It is for now a temporarily template (and the wording may change). In time I hope that it can be removed from the pages (when and if things like CAS get a function like the Special:Booksources-page). Hope to see you around! --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Van der Waals bonding and Van der Waals force merger

The guideline on merger that you cited says, "Cut/paste the non-redundant content from the source page into the destination page." After examining both pages, it was quite apparent that there is essentially nothing in the "bonding" article that is not already covered in the "force" article. If you think you can do a better job of merger, by all means feel free. But having the two redundant articles out there is not helpful to Wikipedia. If you don't want to take this up, perhaps the best solution is an AfD for the bonding article, which covers the same ground, but is not as well written, and completely fails to cite its sources --MCB 05:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Great editing job on the Doubt article. The reorganisation into subsections looks great! Drakonicon 22:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Google personalised front page.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Google personalised front page.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Featured Picture
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Poi circles.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.

Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 07:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Poi circles.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on September 28, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howcheng {chat} 17:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

TVT

hello Jack ! saw your presence in that TVT article today. and i just added a picture of myself on my private page, after seeing your picture. i am a old Herr however... my question: as my english is not the best, can you check edits of mine for errors, if you have time ? last longer edit was Günther Enderlein needing a check. if you want stuff from german de-wp, dont hesitate to contact me. i understand english, but speaking/writing is something else. regards, michael Redecke 16:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Images

Fair use images should not be reproduction quality, that's why I reverted to the small versions.--Peta 05:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Steve Irwin

If you would like to pay tribute to Steve Irwin, who tragically died on September 4th 2006, just feel free to sign your name on Mil Falcon's userpage under tributes. 49Untouchable 18:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Superglue

Could you please check out the article on superglue? As a chemist, you can probably critque it for errors. I am specifically concerned with the recent claim in N.American press that superglue does not function as a glue in an environment that is devoid of water. The claim goes like this: it is fruitless to try to glue ceramic pieces together with superglue unless there is sufficient water present, whether as a small drop or in the air itself. Is this all sensible to you? Thanks. DocEss 17:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Featured Picture
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Giant planes comparison.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.

Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 09:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

This is to let you know the Featured Picture you uploaded and/or nominated Image:Giant planes comparison.svg is scheduled to be Picture of the day on November 6, 2006, when it will be featured on the Main Page. Congratulations! howcheng {chat} 16:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Sidebar redesign final vote!

It's that special, special time! No, grandma's not coming over. No, not time to clean out the fridge. It's sidebar redesign voting time! Yes, the community has narrowed it down to 3 different options, and a vote for the same old original sidebar is a choice one could vote for as well. Voting for multiple options is allowed, and discussion on the whole shebang is right there on the vote page itself.

You're probably getting this message because the sidebar fairy (JoeSmack for now) noticed you commented on the project at some time over on at Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)/Sidebar redesign. Lovely. JoeSmack Talk 06:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality of the Scientology page

Hi. Per Wikipedia:NPOV dispute, if you want to dispute the neutrality of part of the Church of Scientology page you are supposed to describe your objection on the talk page. And in fact what you should probably do first is attempt to edit the article to make it neutral. If you don't want to do that then just list your objection and perhaps another editor will do it for you. You really don't need to tag the section without trying to resolve your issue first. --Justanother 22:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

L-alanine picture

Hi, I've listed your image Image:NMR implementation alanine.png for deletion as it's been replaced by an SVG version, Image:L-alanine.svg. Hope this is OK. Happy editings, –Mysid(t) 05:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I've looked it over, and I'm not absolutely sure that what you have created is L-alanine. I think what you have there is D-alanine. I'm no expert, but until it can be said for definite, I wouldn't want anything to be deleted - Jack (talk) 17:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
You may well be right – I just mimicked the original. I've always had difficulties in differentiating between dextro- and levorotatory molecules, so I don't know either... –Mysid(t) 18:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Hydrogen

Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English. ~ PseudoSudo 03:55, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Lindane

I noticed that you put a copyvio tag on lindane. But the website you refer to is a US FDA website that, if I undertand correctly, as an official government publication is not subject to copyright restrictions. There is no copyright claim on the webpage. Or am I missing something? Just curious. Deli nk 14:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Image

Hello Jrockley! This is a bit of a belated request, but I haven't been on for the last couple of days. Thank you for uploading a new version of Image:Edit Summary-2.png with a cleartype enabled screenshot. However, I am concerned that this image is a little too wide to fit on pages such as Help:Edit summary, and (at least on my browser) shrinking the image makes the text small, fuzzy, and difficult to read. Would you mind editing the image to make the horizontal bar not quite as long in the horizontal direction? I would do it myself but it would not be cleartype. Thank you in advance for your help with this, Dar-Ape 18:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

No probs. How's this do it for ya? - Jack (talk) 06:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Very well, thank you! Have a Nautical star. Dar-Ape 19:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Fractional diagram

Yeah, those look like they would be pretty straightforward to convert to SVG. I'll probably do it today. --Fastfission 15:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

VSS Enterprise

You put a considered for deletion tag on the public domain Image:VSS Enterprise.jpg, but did not list it on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. You then swapped it for Image:SpaceShipTwo.png (a non-free image) on VSS Enterprise & Scaled Composites SpaceShipTwo.

  1. Why do you feel Image:VSS Enterprise.jpg should be deleted? And why didn’t you list it properly?
  2. To use Image:SpaceShipTwo.png, you need to explain your fair-use rationale.

It's not that I don’t myself prefer the image you uploaded, but recent changes to Wikipedia policy state that a fair-use image cannot be used if a free-use image is available. —MJBurrage • TALK • 18:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)