User talk:Eric Herboso/2005

This page maintains an archived record of all comments from my talk page made in 2005.


Searching Wikipedia

Eric, is there any way you can search all of wikipedia alphabeticaly? Also- you should search broken links and add articles or stubs. There are way more of those than stubs that need to be expanded. Just stick to that for a few weeks. Who cares if you dont dent it, you add a lot of shit that way. This unsigned comment was made by DavidMendoza on 01:12, 25 January 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Short answer: yes, at Special:Allpage. But I advise staying away from there, as the sheer number of articles precludes one from ever getting anything done.
You might be more interested in Offline_reports, a list of lists that list pages you might be interested in, which has, for example, a link to Special:Deadendpages, a list of pages that link to nowhere at all.
Oh, and please remember to Sign your posts on talk pages. (c;
Eric Herboso 21:50, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Typos

  • While this technically isn't a flame, I'm still putting it here. You seem to have a strange fascination with typos. I suggest the use of spell-check.
-Signed, Generic Inexplicable Double Major College Student

This unsigned comment was made by 134.10.21.106 on 21:23, 26 January 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for noticing. You're right in that I very rarely use a spellchecker (generally only when I'm using a word processor that automatically spellchecks unless I specifically tell it not to), and I probably should start double-checking my wikipedia edits for something as easy to avoid as spelling errors. But for some reason it just feels somehow 'dirty' to use a spellchecker. I suppose it is similar to my aversion from coding xhtml in anything but notepad, and my propensity toward hardcover books whenever possible, despite paperbacks costing much less money. I think I'll chalk it up to some psychological impairment that I have, and to fix it, I'll make certain of rereading anything I type into Wikipedia at least once before hitting "Save Page".
Eric Herboso 03:44, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Bloom and Strauss

Mr. Herboso--thank you for your comments on my "Talk" page. I have added comments to the Allan Bloom talk page, and reverted my revert, and I added comments to the Leo Strauss talk page without reverting my revert. cheers. --Rexrexilius 03:55, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)


New Mathematics Wikiportal =

I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existant articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.

I encourage you to vote on the current Collaboration of the Week, because I'm very interested in which articles you think need to be written or added to, and because I understand that I cannot do the enormous amount of work required on some of the Math stubs alone. I'm asking for your help, and also your critiques on the way the portal is set up.

Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page, or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

This looks really interesting... I'll be sure to contribute! Eric Herboso 01:59, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)


The Feynman Lectures on Physics entry

Just to let you know that I have included the contents of the three volumens and also renamed the page from "Feynman Lectures on Physics" to "The Feynman Lectures on Physics" LexCorp 17:52, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Good catch! It isn't until you brought it up that I now remember the actual title of the book. (c; Eric Herboso 01:59, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Superman (sex act)

The article did exist but was deleted as nonsense: "the act of throwing a woman out the window after sex, illegal in most jurisdictions". -- Curps 03:05, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Deleted as a dicdef, you mean. But yeah, that seems pretty unencyclopedic. ...sigh... If only we could get these perverts to add something else to the wikipedia, we could get so much more done... Eric Herboso 22:10, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Puzzle on my talk page

Hey Eric, I've been looking at that puzzle you left on my page, and your right it is really tough. I'm getting nowhere with it. If you could give me a hint, that would be great. Remuel 20:07, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Cigar (disambiguation)

In that case if you know what the acronyms are and things like that, then create the disambig page so well meaning editors like me don't see a link to a nonexistant disambig page that looks pointless. -- Dbroadwell 01:53, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I added some info to the disambig page, but I don't know enough to make more than a substub for CII GUI Architecture. - Eric Herboso 02:23, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)


New Mathematics Project Participants List

In case you didn't follow the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Reformat of Participants list, I'm writing to you to let you know that I've converted the "WikiProject Mathematics Participants List" into a table. It is now alphabetical, includes links to the participant's talk page and contribution list, and has a field for "Areas of Interest". Since your name is on the list, I thought you might want to check and/or update your entry.

Regards, Paul August ☎ 16:43, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)


While your revision of the article on Richard's paradox did improve readability and ease of understanding, it appears as if you may have used copyrighted material in doing so. I invite you to discuss this on the article's talk page. Benandorsqueaks 01:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did use Nagel & Newman's book as a reference when rewriting that article, so this might explain my particular choice of phrases being similar to Nagel and Newman. Indeed, the flow of the argument is also taken from Nagel and Newman, since I felt their order of presentation was very good for their discussion of Richard's paradox. But I do not feel that there has been a copyright violation there, as the source material was merely used as a reference when rewriting the article due to its ideas on how to present Richard's paradox most efficiently and readably. If such a use of reference were considered a copy vio, then when writing an article on calculus, you wouldn't be able to reference a calculus book's presentation flow, or when writing an article on history, you wouldn't be able to make the same points that some recent book you'd read had talked about. Because I merely took the ideas from Nagel and Newman and used them to write the article, rather than quote from the text, I feel that this does not constitute a copyright violation. Of course, I am no lawyer, so I may be wrong. Nevertheless, I feel the article is free from copyright violation, and, if edited, should be for readability issues only. A copy of this response is on Talk:Richard's paradox as well. — Eric Herboso 21:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Everyking's Userpage chart

Thanks. It regards Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album), and it has been the subject of some dispute; I want to include it in the article, but there are others who think chart info is unimportant, at least in that degree of detail. So at present it's not included, and I keep it on my user page so I can update it there, in hopes that someday I'll get consensus to restore it. Everyking 17:09, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Random tidbit

I noticed that wikibooks has a wikiversity... pretty interesting stuff. Seems like the math area needs some help and I thought you could add some content. Hope you enjoy! ps- erase this when you see it eric. DavidMendoza 18:44, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Bishop Loras

Thank you for adding that additional information about Bishop Mathias Loras, such as his being President at Spring Hill College. I appreciate your help to "fill in the blanks" on Loras' time in Alabama.
JesseG 06:21, May 19, 2005 (UTC)