|
User talk:GangofOneConcision is a virtue. Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome as well. Cyt p450 was on my watchlist as well. I put together one of the earliest stubs on this just because I needed to mention it in another article and I knew we needed one. Several other people thought so as well and have augmented, but no one has yet endeavored to write a large comprehensive article. Wikipedia has lots of both kinds: the best are obviously the ones where someone puts a lot of effort into a large article, but many useful ones are the work of lots of small additions. Thanks for the additions. Are you up to fleshing this out into a comprehensive article. We would all be admiring. Your first snort is free. This is exactly the way this works. alteripse 12:31, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
Due to lack of knowledge of the subject and time, I am not planning a major revision of this article; although as I learn something, I may throw in some facts.GangofOne 07:22, 11 May 2005 (UTC) Question about FactorialsIn Stirling's approximation, I'm curious how you got those values for huge factorials. JabberWok 05:53, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
? \p 200 realprecision = 202 significant digits (200 digits displayed) ? 123456! +0.0 time = 18,720 ms. %33 = 2.6040699049291378729513930560926568818273270409503019584610185579952057379676834157935 607166171279087355200170616660008572612714566985893730865282934317244121152865814030 204645985573419251305342231136 E574964 Quantum indeterminacy in computationIn what sense do you think that quantum indeterminacy in computation is a separate issue?--Carl Hewitt 20:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC) AwardI think you deserve this. If it weren't for you no one sensible would be putting in the pro pov at all. I agree with what you said about the Nobel prise. If they turn out to be right, it will be a bombshell. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 15:56, 21 July 2005 (UTC)  award you this cool as a cucumber award for the calm manner in which you have behaved in aetherometry Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 15:56, 21 July 2005 (UTC) GoO, your comments here had me rolling with laughter! Fawcett5 02:24, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
you are welcome to fix the "thought experiment" in the Magnetic Field article.(i'm posting this on the Talk:Magnetic_field talk page.) i'm still not clear as to what to fix without bringing in the quantative analysis. (is that what you want me to do?) even if there is outward acceleration between the two lines of charge, there is an instant of time where the relative velocity is zero (therefore not moving relative to each other). it is only this instant of time that i was referring to in the thought experiment. two infinite lines of charge do exert an infinite force on each other, but the force per unit length is finite and if the mass per unit length is also finite, then the outward acceleration is determinable. no? let's be specific about what needs to be fixed. i'm happy if it is fixed. r b-j 03:22, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
You added a link to an ABC article on this man to the Intelligent Design article. Please read the article. From the article:
The coriolis effect articleHi GangofOne, What is your opinion of the situation with the coriolis effect article? I know that in my burning eagerness to communicate the ideas I write too much, and the Talk page is flooded with my comments. Are you able so sieve the important things out of the deluge? Your remarks are quite to the point every time. Have you formed an opinion of how you see the physics of atmospheric motions? --Cleon Teunissen | Talk 21:19, 31 August 2005 (UTC) Hi, I saw your contributions to the list. Thank you for that. Could you write a short description of the publications and explain their importance. I don’t have a proper background in sociology and therefore I don’t feel as if I’m the right person to do it. Thanks, APH 10:45, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
Hello, In a topic related to the one above: Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks,APH 11:39, 11 September 2005 (UTC) LeSage GravityHi, GangofOne, I did see your comment but didn't see anything I could respond to. FYI, the best way for a nonproject member to contact me is by leaving a clear and concise message in my talk page. I expect that the Bulletin will be cleaned up regularly and probably won't be archived (except in "history"). The reason is that since the project members wish to spend as little time as possible on such matters, we don't want any entry to be more than a few lines. So please don't be surprised or offended if your comment there disappears. I wish you would condescend to explain (in a message on my talk page) what you found offensive (?) or ironical (?) about my comment about the future of Wikipedia. I would be truly surprised if you thought I was trolling, if that is what you mean to imply, but if you really did think that I would like to know why. Perhaps I am too new a user to know if due to some past history, some might find my expression of doubt offensive. It is surely obvious that since I am editing here, while I do think the current Wikipedia model is doomed to failure, as I say on my user page, I also believe that Wikipedia is currently a valuable resource for suitably sceptical students, and despite my medium term fears about the future of Wikipedia, I do expect something of longer lasting value to come our work. Fair enough? ---CH (talk) 20:08, 7 October 2005 (UTC) Where and how do we classify an article about slashdotting?This page [[3]] Was slashdotted [[4]] Any blips? Artoftransformation 03:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
I figured it out. Not too hard...--Artoftransformation 09:03, 10 November 2005 (UTC) Hydrino theory and Green FrogsSir: just wondered why you added this link: "*http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/4/1 "Hydrogen result causes controversy", August 5, 2005, recent articles, pro and con." Its a recent article, citing Rathke's article, and a math paper with terrible english. I would peak at that math paper. I quoted it. It was on target about the controversy, vs this no new information article. Artoftransformation
David Kennedy pagePlease stop deliberately introducing incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
==External link==
+ A quote by David Kennedy expressing his anger at his family.
[http://fatboy.cc/Rosemary.htm ] Near the end.
But Rosemary’s story, so horrifying in its casual, callous brutality, was never forgotten by
millions of Americans, and certainly not by any members of the Kennedy family. In the late
1970s, Bobby’s doomed son, David, was reading a copy of the pro-drug magazine High Times when
he came across a story on lobotomies. Naturally enough, one of the illustrations was a photo
of his beautiful aunt Rosemary, pre-lobotomy.
“She had a new pair of white shoes on,” David recalled later for the authors Peter Collier and
David Horowitz. “The thought crossed my mind that if my grandfather was alive the same thing
could have happened to me that happened to her. She was an embarrassment; I am an embarrassment.
She was a hindrance; I am a hindrance. As I looked at this picture, I began to hate my grandfather
and all of them for having done the thing they had done to her and for doing the thing they w
ere doing to me.”
David died of a drug overdose in 1984....
Correction thanks!GangofOne, thanks for the typo input on the human thermodynamics glossary page; much appreciated! If you have anymore input, let me know. Later, --Wavesmikey 05:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Removal AfD tag from Afshar experimentDear GangofOne, please remove the AfD tag from the experiment page. Who is supposed to close the voting process? It's already been 9 days, way over the usual voting time. Why?! -- Afshar 15:16, 28 December 2005 (UTC) Jason Group EditDear Gang of One, I liked your solution to the links with more speculation that fact. I had removed those links, but you're right, readers should be able to choose for themselves. - Ann 151.196.123.30
Dear Gang of One, Your addition of recent studies is just fine, and thank you for keeping up with it. Several of those listed as members, however, may not be. Did you get their names from the studies? If so, not everyone who works on a study is a Jason -- sometimes the group brings in experts for just one study. Maybe the best solution is to introduce the membership list by saying where the names came from, and adding the caveat that study authors aren't necessarily members. - Ann Also, dear Gang of One, I just noticed that you'd requested that I go through the links that I identified as having more speculation than fact and classify which was which. I think that's not feasible: separating the real from the imaginary would essentially mean rewriting the links' content, of which there's a lot. I'd just as soon leave it at caveat emptor. - Ann
And aren't you kind to say so, and to supply that link, you nice Gang of One. I do thank you. I corrected it: I think you mixed it up with another book with a similar message and a nearly identical cover (publishers can be such idiots), by a friend of mine, Sharon Weinberger. And really, I was charmed by that link. - Ann To exercise the possibility to vote
I knew that William is up for adminship, I hadn't decided yet whether to vote. I don't know. We will see what the future will bring. --Cleonis | Talk 22:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC) Question forom Janusz KarpinskiHi, this is Janusz Karpinski. I am writing to you because you voted "keep" in AfD for aetherometry entry. The present situation is that by Wikipedia standards there is no reputable secondary literature at all about aetherometry. The minority view is contained only in primary sources, which do not even fulfill Wikipedia standards for scientific references, and there are no other publications, so there is no majority view. "Majority view" here does not mean view of majority of Wikipedia administrators, it means published and generally accepted view of outside scientific community. There is nothing like this for aetherometry. As result, nothing in entry can be verified or referenced, it is all interpretation and opinion. This is not how encyclopedia should work, and is against Wikipedia policy. Since you said that entry should be kept, you must have idea how entry can start to provide verifiable encyclopedic information when there are no existing secondary sources. How can this problem be solved? I think you cannot just say "keep" and leave to others dealing with this problem, which to me seems completely not solvable. Please, describe what your solution is, and how you will personally help make aetherometry entry honest, reputable and verifiable. Sincerely, Janusz. Januszkarp 23:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC) if you're a good boyone day i may tell you the story of One Man Gang, a notable personality i met at louisiana state penitentiary at angola. Zen Destiny 01:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Help needed: 2nd deletion reuest for Afshar experiment articleA crackpot is again requesting deletion of the article. [5] Your vote would be appreciated. Prof. Afshar 17:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you added a {{prod}} tag to the article Qwiff. Unfortunately, there were no comments left as to the reason for nomination. It looks like a good call; however, I have de-prodded the article and moved it to AfD. I would invite you to comment on the article's AfD page. James084 13:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC) Danko GeorgievDear GangofOne, I wish to ban Danko Georgiev from Wikipedia for his repeated accusations of Fraud to me regarding my experiment [6] on the talk pages. My experimental results were verified by faculty from Harvard and other schools. I will not allow this idiot to ruin my reputation. He must be repudiated by the Wikipedia community. Any help you can offer in this regard would be appreciated.-- Afshar 06:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC) Einstein and TobleroneHi Gang, It wasn't your link of "Toblerone" at Albert Einstein (which was of course fine) that I was "reverting", but rather I removed the entire sentence, see Talk:Albert Einstein#Toblerone patent?. Paul August ☎ 07:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Your revert on the pumpPlease look at the history of the pump. That section has been the source of a dynamic IP vandalizing with legal threats and link spam. I see you've edited to it, but since the chap is now persona non grata (along with their linkspam), I don't see why we should give this website's ramblings any more credence. --Golbez 09:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Admins Who Stalk, Block, Revert, Blank
JoeBot mistakethank you for catching that. i will dutifully pull an arm hard for my mistake (ouch! it's my policy ;). i have encountered these kinds of quotes before, and usually catch them (and ignore the instance), and so this is the first to slip by me. i shall take measures so as this doesn't happen again (i will have JoeBot ignore any article with the word "[sic]" in it). thanks again. JoeBot 22:03, 19 April 2006 (UTC) Edits by --Michael C. Price on Afshar experiment page
Though Afshar's work is still the subject of ongoing interpretation and discussion, a significant portion of the scientific community is of the opinion that Afshar's experiment does not refute complementarity. Some general criticisms are:
As Michael claims, those statments are supposedly "popular views" that preexisted my experiment, and as such must be present in peer-reviewed publication predating my work. All I have asked him to do is to provide such valid ref.s but he has persistently avoided doing so and instead engaged in personal attacks. He seems to have a lot of time on his hands to be on Wikipeida constatntly, but I don't. This is turning to oneupmanship, and I don't have time for such antcis. Maybe he would heed your request. Thanks!-- Prof. Afshar 13:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
TT newspapersI'm puzzled by this edit. Please explain. Guettarda 21:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks againGang - Thanks again for your suggestion regarding ulcers as a mistake in the history of science. I've been reading up on the history, and it looks like it will be perfect for my purposes. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 23:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC) NHMFLYou wrote: "It is the largest and highest powered magnet laboratory, ". it says, but it doesn't say how "powerful" the fields are. --GangofOne 06:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
The Lighter Side Of Back Streets
I put some Pep Talk on my user page, of which you might like to partake. You have some mean one on yours as well. I took mine from a guy who apparantly wrote on Wikipedia more than 250 years ago.
Respect, (Lunarian 10:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC))
This ?, hopefully nothing to be ashamed of ?
Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articlesWikipedia:Wikipedians with articles presently is up for deletion at MfD. Please consider participating in that discussion. -- Jreferee (Talk) 21:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC) WikiProject Physics participationYou received this message because your were on the old list of WikiProject Physics participants. On 2008-06-25, the WikiProject Physics participant list was rewritten from scratch as a way to remove all inactive participants, and to facilitate the coordination of WikiProject Physics efforts. The list now contains more information, is easier to browse, is visually more appealing, and will be maintained up to date. If you still are an active participant of WikiProject Physics, please add yourself to the current list of WikiProject Physics participants. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 14:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC) Charles H, Townes has diedYou reverted a death notice; Charles H. Townes has indeed died.[3]
Beamjockey (talk) 23:41, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Open Wikipedia Ranking
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Open Wikipedia Ranking, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 06:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
PBC FoundationThank you for your appropriate comment regarding PBC Foundation. I fail to see why this should be merged back or externally linked from the disease and deleted! It may only represent an under-recognized disorder, although there are many similar patient charities dismissed as Other stuff exists, but it has contributed to major publications and had national media coverage ... Any further advice? Jrfw51 (talk) 16:59, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Article for Deletion/KeepingHey hope you are doing well. There is a page you have contributed to that is being considered for deletion: List of Christian Nobel laureates. You are welcome to put in any input on the issues by going to the page and clicking on the link for that article. Jobas (talk) 14:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for November 16Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting conspiracy theories, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Harris. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Disambiguation link notification for May 5Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of online encyclopedias, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages AIME, SPE and SWE. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC) ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! Hello, GangofOne. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) Your submission at Articles for creation: Christian Transhumanist Association (June 5)
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in. This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! VQuakr (talk) 22:45, 6 August 2017 (UTC) Possible copyright violations reverted.I have reverted your additions to Bloomberg Billionaires Index and List of members of the Forbes 400 as these appear to be substantial copyright violations. Please note that we can not copy large lists compiled by private intellectual property owners. bd2412 T 16:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
DRN case closedThank you for seeking assistance with the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Unfortunately, the case you filed had to be closed as it did not meet the minimum DRN criteria. There was not an extensive enough talkpage discussion. Please use a talkpage to discuss ways to improve the article. If, after a good collaborative effort is made, a dispute still exists, you should feel welcome to refile. Nihlus 06:10, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
verbiage pasted from there, for the future. ==== 1.4.1 Summary of dispute by bd2412 ==== Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker. Although the information in these lists is factual, the respective businesses (Forbes and Bloomberg) make creative decisions with respect what other information to present (dollar amounts, age of the subject, field of industry). The facts are not protected, but the "selection and arrangement" is. Copying this complete group of information, as was done in this case, is likely actionable under copyright law, and should be avoided. bd2412 T 22:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC) === 1.4.2 User talk:GangofOne discussion === quickie legal question : bd2412 says he/she is a lawyer (presumably in USA). I am not a lawyer. bd2412 above talks of author's "creative decisions". It is not clear there are any creative decisions in the original, just practical decisions. I hope others will have lawyerly input, this type of issue happens all the time on Wikipedia. Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Christian Transhumanist Association, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 13 November 2017 (UTC) ArbCom 2017 election voter messageHello, GangofOne. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for December 15Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ROOT, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cling (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.) It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 15 December 2017 (UTC) Your draft article, Draft:Christian Transhumanist Association Hello, GangofOne. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Christian Transhumanist Association". In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. DGG ( talk ) 04:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC) Your edit to "Julian Day"I checked the equation, as explained below, with the source, Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac 2nd ed p. 604, and found the article agreed with the source before your change. JDN = (1461 × (Y + 4800 + (M − 14)/12))/4 +(367 × (M − 2 − 12 × ((M − 14)/12)))/12 − (3 × ((Y + 4900 + (M - 14)/12)/100))/4 + D − 32075 Left paren: 11 Right paren: 11 Below, first line is Wikipedia 9 Febrary 2019 version Second line is GangOfOne's version (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julian_day&oldid=893204246) Third line is version I typed directly from my copy of book at 20:00 UT 19 April 2019. JDN = (1461 × (Y + 4800 + (M − 14)/12))/4 +(367 × (M − 2 − 12 × ((M − 14)/12)))/12 − (3 × ((Y + 4900 + (M - 14)/12)/100))/4 + D − 32075 JDN = (1461 × (Y + 4800 + (M − 14)/12))/4 +(367 × (M − 2 − 12 × ((M − 14)/12)))/12) − (3 × ((Y + 4900 + (M - 14)/12)/100))/4 + D − 32075 JD = (1461 x (Y + 4800 + (M - 14)/12))/4 + (367 x (M - 2 - 12 x ((M - 14)/12)))/12 - (3 x ((Y + 4900 + (M - 14)/12)/100))/4 + D - 32075 Repeating the Wikipedia 9 Febrary 2019 version on the first line below and the version I typed on the second line below, but modifying the spacing in my typed version to facilitate comparison: JDN = (1461 × (Y + 4800 + (M − 14)/12))/4 +(367 × (M − 2 − 12 × ((M − 14)/12)))/12 − (3 × ((Y + 4900 + (M - 14)/12)/100))/4 + D − 32075 JD = (1461 x (Y + 4800 + (M - 14)/12))/4 +(367 x (M - 2 - 12 x ((M - 14)/12)))/12 - (3 x ((Y + 4900 + (M - 14)/12)/100))/4 + D - 32075 This shows the Wikipedia 9 Febrary 2019 version agrees with the book. Jc3s5h (talk) 20:17, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
David Ray Griffin
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
|
