User talk:Zandperl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Zandperl talk guidelines

If you're posting a comment to me, I'd like to request you follow the below guidelines to make it easier for me to read.

  • Add new stuff at the bottom
  • Use topic headings (two equals signs before and after a topic name).
  • Sign with your username and time (four tildes).
  • I'll reply to your talk page unless you don't leave a username, request otherwise, your page is protected, or I feel there's reason to post here instead.
  • stuff'll be periodically cleaned to User talk:Zandperl/archive

[edit] London symbols

Assuming no-one else has replied to your query, I'll have a go. The lion and unicorn are both supporters of the royal arms - but the unicorn symbolises Scotland (there are two on the Royal Coat of Arms of Scotland)

The heraldic supporters of the City of London are dragons (or are they wyverns?), hence the use around the City, but the City of Westminster's crest is a portcullis, the Parliamentary symbol - would this be the gate you saw?

Hope this helps. Man vyi 12:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Glad to help. Most of this info is in the various articles, but I suppose you'd have to know what you were looking for to find it. Man vyi 10:06, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I came to let you know that I'd answered your long-lost and forlorn question on Talk:England; but I see that somebody has already answered you here. Well, perhaps some other reader of the that page will find it useful. Doops | talk 08:04, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] degrees and arcseconds only for declination?

Hi, In the articles on arcsecond and minute of arc, you state that degrees (and minutes and seconds of arc) are used only when expressing declination. I have corrected this error on one page and a friend of mine did so on the other. Are there any other articles where you have made this unjustified claim? MHD 14:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

You are completely correct in the comment you posted on my talk page. I'm sorry if my message from yesterday came across too harsh. It is indeed a good idea to place a caveat on those pages about the possible confusion between seconds/minutes and arcseconds/arcminutes. I propose to move the discussion about better wording and possible further improvement to the arcminute talk page. MHD 10:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bunker Hill holiday

I've been a resident of Hampden, Hampshire and Middlesex counties in Massachusetts for about 45 years and I've never once encountered a Bunker Hill holiday. Are you thinking of Patriot's day? Can you point to something at the state's website? WikiParker 22:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] June Meetup in New York

Hi, I noticed you on a list of New Yorkers. If you are interested in around we are having a meetup Wikipedians in June. Take a peek at this and please tell any other Wikipedians that you think might be interested in participating about this event. Thanks. Alex756 02:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CTY Cross Dressing the Lancaster way

I had no idea the practice was now a CTY 'tradition', but I can speculate that your story regarding the Lancaster skirt wearing 'incident' derived from me. To my recollection your version is almost entirely myth, though someone might have done something similar before or after. The tie story is probably a better explanation, as almost every CTY tradition can be traced in some form to Matthew. I also wouldn't doubt that changing mores resulted in a cross-dressing Saturday, to which some intrepid soul, well versed in fourth generation stories, put 2 and 2 together to get 17. CTY should probably be the focus of a study on the formation of oral traditions.

In first term of '90 or '91 I wore an ankle length pink skirt, borrowed from a friend (Angel?). Not so brave as all that, I seem to recall wearing it over my shorts (there were comments about my leg hair); and far from being original, my primary motivation, in what can only be described as CTY logic, was to impress girls. After putting the thing on, three friends and I walked around F&M on a Friday or Saturday afternoon (CTY was far less regimented then: the only crime was leaving campus unattended, and mandatory fun, only recently implemented, was for weekends only. I don't recall anything mandatory in '89 or '90). We wandered around the tennis courts and into the F&M library, where the librarians stared for a good couple of minutes. Eventually we just sat under a tree in the quad. There were a lot of questions/jokes/comments/glances from friends and passersby. Only one was particularly nasty, to which I quickly retorted "You're just jealous because you don't have the balls to wear a skirt." That probably got me farther with the girls than anything else.

There was a lot of talk about me wearing the skirt to that evening's dance. Being shy, I declined. However, I might recall, very hazilly, other boys wearing skirts that evening. I do not remember cross dressing at any future dance, though '91 was my last term (I did visit in '92). I certainly wasn't forced to take the thing off by staff. The worst that might have happened was snarky comments from a passing RA.

It's amazing how memory works. I had completely forgotten about that until reading your comment. Now I can remember leaves and twigs sticking to the skirt from sitting under the tree. Funny.--Mrdarcey 20:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


Just because I'm lazy, you left this last August:
Word of mouth at Lancaster has it that at least 10 years ago, there was a male student who wore a skirt. The administration at the time was not nearly as "Zero Indifference" as they are now, and ordered him to dress gender-appropriately. In retaliation, at the Second Saturday dance, a large number of students cross-dressed to show their solidarity. From this, the tradition of Second Saturday was born. However, I do not have a solid source on this. Has anyone done research on CTY culture?
I'm not really familiar with any of the online CTY communities. I just sort of stumbled across the wiki entry yesterday while procrastinating. There is a CTYwiki, which has a Hall of Fame/Shame section, but most of the entries there are, understandably, much newer. I do think it's wonderful that CTY, even after so much bad press, continues to have such a positive effect on young people today.
When were you at CTY? You're blog says you're 28, so it's possible we were at the same session (Lancaster, '91?). I was called Floyd back then, but I can't say that I'm in anyway significant to anything other than my own mind. Cheers,--Mrdarcey 19:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Islamic Origins of Peer Review?

Since you contributed a passage on this topic at Avicenna#Philosophy please comment on the discussion at Talk:History of scientific method#Peer review in medieval Islam?. --SteveMcCluskey 19:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit]

Why do you tell us your birthday?--Emporer 19:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Acetaminophen recall

Zandperl, I have moved the note you added to Paracetamol into a separate section, I hope you won't object. If you'd like to chime in, please go ahead (preferably on Talk:Paracetamol so that other editors can follow an eventual discussion). Thank you, Fvasconcellos 14:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. There doesn't seem to be a consensus yet, so I won't remove it — I see no harm in the section remaining in the article as of now. Fvasconcellos 21:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Radiation

There was a change on the Radiography page, where "gamma rays come from the nucleus" was changed to "are more likely to come from..." In radiology we are taught that the main difference between gamma and x rays (since their wavelengths and energies can overlap) is the source... that gammas come from the nucleus and x rays from the k-shell electron (if it's going to do anything useful). Is it useful to say "more likely" in a medical radiography context?
The only people using gammas in the dept are the nuke med guys, using pair production (530kev), and for them it's always a nuclear source (otherwise it's too weak and is merely an x-ray or even heat). As for medical xrays, they are always formed by electron interaction. Our overheated electrons mostly (99 or so % of the time) don't even hit anything, but make an electron in the (almost always) Tungstun anode wobble-- good enough. More rarely, they hit something, like W's electron. My old textbooks are in another country and I won't get them shipped to me until June, but the book to use for the citation needed is the purple Carlton book or the Bushong Radiologic Science for Technologists. Gaviidae 17:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I can probably write a good few sentences for medical sources of gammas and xrays. The whole page is written by like fifty people, but I'd have it in the section describing how the rays are made say in the vaccuum tube (xray) and pair production (gamma). The thing is, that page was originally one and it split, so there is also industrial sources, which I understand very little. I didn't think about that when I wrote your first message above... but in any case the instances of gammas in space won't apply either way to radiography since it's only involving human-made human-used photons. Damn I wish I had my books here with me. Anyway, it's cool that at least someone it working on that page. It's been neglected lately. Gaviidae 06:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration

I have initiated a Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Nearly Headless Nick disregarding consensus and consensus-related policies, a matter in which I believe you to have been involved in the case history of. Your commentary may be appreciated. Balancer 13:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Schwortz

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Schwortz, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Schwortz fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

Housekeeping - cleanup per WP:SU


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Schwortz, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 21:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

[edit] Image:Burrowing owl.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Burrowing owl.jpg, 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. MONGO 06:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The deletion nom can be seen here...it looks like all the images are in the public domain since its a U.S. Government website, so it is an honest mistake and no big deal at all. Have a good one!--MONGO 06:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rolling resistance

Hi,

There is a discussion at Polish-wiki between me i.e. User:IZ and user:Stok on article Rolling resistance, especially subsection In braking. A few years ago you wrote : The actual force applied in breaking (for example, clamps applied to disk brakes) is internal, and by Newton's First Law cannot cause a change in the vehicle's motion. [[1]]. For me your statement is right, User: Stok claims that it is wrong and should be crossed out from Polish wiki. Please, give us more explanation and grounds for your claim. Let us know your comment on the subsection ‘’In braking’’. Your comment will likely influence further edits of Polish version Rolling resistance. I am looking forward to your reply and with kind regards from Polish-wiki User:IZ --78.88.154.97 (talk) 18:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

PS. Please, place your answer at my talk

Thank you for your reply and don’t mind “wrong language”. We do not resent because the point is not a language but substance of the matter and necessity to elucidate all questions thus improving Wikipedia. The section you wrote down your comment was right. Your comment is helpful and influence our discussion. Should we have more questions we will ask again. Kind regards from Poland. User:User:IZ and User:User:Stok —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.88.154.97 (talk) 22:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nexus Airways

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Nexus Airways, 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) 22:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)