User talk:GeorgeStepanek/Archive2

Archive 1


Women and Weight-training

The funny thing is that I read that about women's strength increases being proportionate to men (although they didn't give a numeric comparison) in a book about weight-training within the past 48 hours, and it's a book that's actually in my apartment!! But I may not have time to track it down for a few days. If you want to edit out that statement until I find the source, it's fine with me. Jeremy J. Shapiro 18:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your rewriting seems quite fine to me. Thanks. I'm making a note to find that reference. And, as a relative newbie, I appreciate your warning derived from your deletion experience. Jeremy J. Shapiro 04:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Newbieness

As confirmation of my relative "newbie" status, I don't even know how to find out the total number of edits I or anyone else has made, although I guess for myself if I selected "My contributions" and set the display at 500, I'd be able to figure it out. Also, my longevity here is deceptive, because I did a bunch of stuff when I first discovered Wikipedia a bit more than 2 years ago, and then for most of the next two years I just didn't come back here, I was focussing on other things, and I only started again this summer. So in a way I think of myself as really doing things seriously here for the past three months or so, since I'd forgotten most of what I learned about the system two years ago. But thanks for your encouragement! And, yes, I agree with you that it's particularly important that the weight-training article be in good shape, since probably lots of people will go to it for actual practical information that they'll use in their lives. Jeremy J. Shapiro 05:38, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Intense frisbee

I added some comments to the AfD for this page that may answer your questions and lead you to reconsider your vote. Thanks.—Gaff ταλκ 21:51, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello: I too am a little tired. I'm especially tired of AfD page "debates" in general. People seem to vote the same way on every article without looking into it. I have tried to reason in the discussion, actually done some leg work by talking to contribuotrs, etc (both for pages that I think should be kept or should be deleted). It seems that nobody reads comments anyway, so why bother. If that guy wants to invent a sport and write an article on it, why should I have to expend energy to get it deleted. (That leaves me feeling like a jerk). Maybe somebody else will read his article and start playing and then it will be notable. I would rather vote delete on obvious nonsense, vanity, or attacking articles. thanks.—Gaff ταλκ 01:58, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Healthy eating

Aloha. I understand your point, but I'm fairly certain the POV tag is not used in that way. Unless you can cite specific examples pertaining to the current tag, it should be removed. Listing the article on the Wikipedia:Requests for comment might be an alternative to using the tag (RFC is appropriate when you want other Wikipedians to visit the page, to allow a consensus or a better quality of decision, to help resolve a dispute or break a deadlock). Your thoughts? --Viriditas | Talk 09:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again. No, the RfC process is what you are looking for (you wrote: Hence the inivitation for others with different points of view to contribute their thoughts) and indeed, it is for articles as well as users. See: Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Article_content_disputes and Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/All. The tag that you have added to Healthy eating is used for specific content disputes, not for a hypothetical dispute. If you can't describe an actual dispute, or give me the ability to resolve it, then I think you should remove the tag and add a listing to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/All in order to invite other users to the page. I've left you another comment on Talk:Healthy eating. Mahalo. --Viriditas | Talk 09:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
FYI..I've added the article to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society and law. --Viriditas | Talk 10:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bridges

Yes, it is excluded because it is a cable-stayed bridge. See list of longest cable stayed bridges. Samuel Wantman 20:39, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Physics

Thanks for the interest George, but in retrospect I don't think I can contribute to the physics wiki. I notice that most of the talk on the energy page reckons it's a bad page, which I agree with. However, while I feel that the correct and verifiable goals for wiki are necessary, they are not sufficient. I maybe have got to shift wiki policy to have accessible and didactic as primary aims as well. In physcis, this translates to teaching classical physics only first, then adding QM and GR as seperate standalone sections. This is not something that could be acheived by nit-picking the existing artciel, of which I do have numerous nit-pick criticsms. These include (but are not limited to) calling chemical energy potential. While ameanable to QM maths giving field descriptions for molecular forces, is not the clearest way to teach the stuff. Molecules exist in one or a few confugurations, potential energy to be sensible requires the continuous variables of classical physics. A photon has energy, momentum and speed, but to say the speed causes the energy is to read too much causation into QM and QCD models, again kinetic energy as a concept really needs the continuous varaibles of classical mechanics to be useful.

I feel I care too much about physics to enter the debate properly, I will become impatient and rude. It has been a useful few days reading all of your comments and thinking about what becoming involved would require.NeilUK 21:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Body for Life

Thanks George, appreciated. Just so you know I have absolutely no commercial interest in EAS or Body for Life having left the company in June last year. However I guess ten years of working for them made me used to writing in a commercial style! Appreciated once again. Glen Stollery 03:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re www.wikipedia.org.nz

Probably a good idea... certainly it's an idea worth mentioning on the Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board. I'm not really sure how to go about doing this sort of thing myself, but someone there will probably have some experience in sorting out domain names. Grutness...wha? 09:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to our attention George. I've posted at the Village pump as this use of our name is potentially of concern to more than just New Zealanders.-gadfium 21:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
George, see the village pump or NZ notice board for my latest on this issue. Still doing the letter? Glen Stollery (My contributions) 05:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the message, good to hear they're onto it. :) Glen Stollery (My contributions) 06:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Young Turks

I'm sorry! Is Young Turks going to put up for deletion? I've noticed that you removed the AfD tag from the article, however. It was redirected from The Young Turks, that I saw at AfD. adnghiem501 07:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was unaware of either Young Turks or The Young Turks was put up for deletion on AfD, but these pages would be bizarre towards me. The Young Turks should be redirected instead of being placed on AfD. I've already seen its debate has been closed. We don't need to forward this discussion anymore. Thanks! adnghiem501 02:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Other names of large numbers

You voted keep at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Other names of large numbers because you believe not all the numbers were made up. I have since traced the origins of the number on this list to several websites and blogs which state this is original research. The valid numbers are already listed at Names of large numbers. Would you consider changing your vote to delete? Cheers, —Ruud 00:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polyisobutylene

Please check the polyisobutylene and butyl rubber articles, the guy who posted the original articles is starting to revert them. He has also posted information about me on my talk page to prove he knows who I am. I've counted 5 user names and IP addresses he's posted from. I'm pretty new to wikipedia and I feel like I'm getting in over my head. Is there something that can be done about this user and his behavior? Thanks. Thatcher131 22:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

Hi. Please can i ask u you help me by deletion of this original research article of Iranian peoples. there is nothing such as that in reality. exept linguitc and ancient times which both have their own articles. everytime I put the deletion tag those people remove the tag. Pleasehelp. Thank you very much. Diyako Talk + 01:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

translations?

Hello GeorgeS... I see you also love the new list of wikipedia languages on meta. Are you interested in helping keep that kind of information up to date over time? I am putting together a language group to keep an eye on such things and describe better tools for tracking multiling. statistics... Cheers, +sj + 02:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub tracking

Those statistics you mentioned shouldn't be difficult to tally. I'll try to create a chart next time I get the chance. Just ballpark though, there are ~3.5 million articles total in the English Wikipedia, and I think that most of them are redirects. The "Talk:" namespace is probably the largest after Main, but I forget the exact numbers. --Dantheox 07:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nadia Chambers

I could technically have deleted that article as an A7 as there was no assertion of notability. However, I decided to give the editor a chance to improve it. The IMDB database says she was on Grange Hill for 3 years, and that she appeared in the BBC's highly acclaimed Pride and Prejudice. She is notable enough, I'm sure; here in the UK those 2 factors would be enough to make her legendary I would think! --kingboyk 08:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unit 200

Heh! Thanks for the compliment. There are (or have been) tougher stubs to sort out there than that, trust me. Try to sort an article that has anything to do with illicit drugs, and you'll see what I mean. By the way, don't you think that pic on your main page is a little - uh - ...imposing? Black-Velvet 11:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry!

Yes, I should have let you know. I did leave a note at WP:CP, but I'll leave one on the article talk page as well. Thanks for being so thorough. Chick Bowen 06:16, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of false and anti-Iranian information being fabricated into these articles. It must be addressed.69.196.139.250 04:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brion interview

I had actually thought about doing a tech-related interview. Perhaps I'll do it in the next week or two. Ral315 (talk) 07:45, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Offer

I was about to add to the weight training article, but I put it off. I then read a lot of the Register's articles on Wikipedia and came across Project Galatea. I think it is a worthwhile service and I'd be glad to help. - IstvanWolf 06:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, I could provide descriptions for many of the currently unlinked/unexpanded exercises under "Exercises for specific muscle groups" (e.g. leg extension, curl, calf raises ... well, everything in red). So yes, I was thinking along the lines of the subordinate articles, as opposed to the main. - IstvanWolf

Icon-Based Gaming Redirection

Hi, George. Just want to say thanks for taking the time to put in that redirection for my article on icon-based gaming. I totally forgot how to do that! Stovetopcookies 05:35, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: A problem that needs a Toolserver developer—can you help please?

RobiH has been very active in improving the Wikimedia project lists on Meta, but he's now gone a bit far and changed the pages to redirect to pages on his own site that show adverts. (For an example see List of Wikibooks.) Before this blows up into a huge kerfuffle, can we possibly migrate this stuff onto the Wikimedia Toolserver? The work that he's done is great, but the idea of making money from traffic redirected from wikimedia is dodgy to say the least. Can you help sort this out, please? GeorgeStepanek\talk 08:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't handle accounts, that's Dab's job. See m:Toolserver for information on obtaining an account. A script to generate a list of projects would not be difficult to write, and a bot could be run on the toolserver every so often which would update the Meta pages. Rob Church 16:04, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Db-web

Template:Db-web has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Rob 07:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion

Hi! I saw you changed my speedy from vanity to attack - sorry about that! I am just beginning to look at all the cruft people slip into the new changes page. I only put vanity, though, because the subject of the article has the same name as the sole contributor. So I think that the derision is tongue-in-cheek. Regardless, it should be deleted ASAP!  :) Joey 08:02, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NZ chapter

I see you have your name down as interested in setting up Wikimedia New Zealand.

I have worked on a draft Constitution for Wikimedia New Zealand. However I am not a lawyer so it will need some work :) Wikimedia_New_Zealand/Draft_Constitution

I hope if we get a few more people on board we will be able to meet all the Prerequisite and get the chapter started :)

Please let me know if you are still interested Brian | (Talk) 08:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I feel a meetup would be a good idea, the timing will be the hard part, to see when we can get the most kiwipedians to turn up.
Maybe to start of, we have a meeting on IRC (maybe channel #wikimedia-nz) and see "who's interested' in coming & ideas.
I see that the Aussies are on there way to getting a chapter set up. Should I look at getting a Wikimedia New Zealand mailing list set up for interested people?
Well thanks all I can think of for now :) Brian | (Talk) 10:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds Like a plan :) I'll need a few weeks notice so I can try and get up there through. (about IRC & mailing list; I was stealing ideas from the Aussie effort:)
The Biggest thing we face IMO is, to become Incorporated, we need at least 15 people (then we need people to stick with it) Brian | (Talk) 08:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When it comes to signing, I think we could just post around the paper (Possably Fax, not sure through) Anything else: Committee meetings, AGM's etc. I think we can conduct them over the internet. Brian | (Talk) 09:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll come along to any meetup organised in Auckland. Sunday at noon would suit me fine.-gadfium 09:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I'll try to be there (I'll hate to see the cost of petrol then :). meta:Wikimedia New Zealand/meeting <-- Some ideas I thought about the other day that we could discuss. Brian | (Talk) 11:15, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There was a good point raised about the age, I'm a few months away from turning 18. (still 17 in June). So is the bar the best place, I mean will I and any one else who's under 18 be able to get in ? Brian | (Talk) 12:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel kind of silly, but

I can't find the place on Metawiki to request a new Wikiquote. There are quite a few proverbs and citations in Ido and I suppose it's time to start a Wikiquote as well and gather all the content on the various Geocities and other pages into one place. Is it an easy process to get one started? Thanks. Mithridates 06:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cent

Hello, I see you've recently edited {{cent}}. This is quite all right and I encourage you to help keep it current. But please don't forget to log your changes at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Template log. This will help us stay all on the same page -- no pun intended. Thank you. John Reid 16:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Auckland meetup

Thanks for the invitation, but on my income I have to plan for a month to visit Christchurch. I haven't been to Auckland since 2001! So please pass on my apologies :) Grutness...wha? 23:26, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me too. For different reasons, I'm unlikely to be near Auckland (where I've not been for 30+ years) in the next year or three. Good luck. Now a central Wellington meeting??... Robin Patterson 06:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me also. Unfortunately, I'm in the US right now, and probably won't be back in NZ (let alone Auckland) until the end of the year. --Allan McInnes (talk) 02:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, thanks for the invitation. But I'm not so sure I will be in Auckland on June. I might going back to Jakarta, Indonesia. But plans could change...so we'll see. Thanks again! HoneyBee 10:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old Skool Esperanzial note

Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Auckland meetup

Thanks for the invite but i dont think ill be able to make it. sorry :) BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 01:05, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Auckland Meet

Unfortunately I moved down to Wellington a couple of months ago, and I'm not due back up there until mid-July at earliest :) —porges(talk) 01:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki meeting in auckland

Hi, thanks for the invite.

Living in Invers, its just a bit difficult sorry. I love the idea about Wikimedia NZ though!

All the best to you guys that do go, I wish I could join you.

--Dafing 04:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Auckland meetup

Just to let you know that a meetup is planned in Auckland for the 25th of June (see Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland for more details), and that you are cordially invited. GeorgeStepanek\talk 00:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the offer, but I cannot attend as I do not live in Auckland currently. --HamedogTalk|@ 07:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nor do I live in Auckland, yet should I be there for that date, then I would love to pop along. Enzedbrit 09:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the offer. But i'm all the way down in Kaikoura, and i'm busy shooting a movie. Cheers--Matt von Furrie 07:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for inviting. Not sure if I will be in Auckland then, but will update in Wikipedia:Meetup/Auckland once i'm sure of my plans. Sasank

the hiss

a) not even me it was my brother but you didn't know that.

b) does something have to be important to remain on the site?

oh well you're probably right

Thanks

I appreciate your copy editing of my first contribution Ralf Hotchkiss. I knew there had to be a way to do footnotes, but I hadn't figured it out yet. My only disappointment is that doing this Wikipedia thing is obviously a huge time-sink (I can't imagine how much time you regulars and patrollers must spend on it), and I hadn't anticipated that there were so many rules and procedures to learn -- if I had, I wouldn't have been so bold about adding content. Of course, one of the rules, I guess, is to be bold.... Mildredofbeulah 12:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service.
This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins.
The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome!
Note from the editor
As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!
  1. Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel.
  2. A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect.
  3. Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct.
  4. Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop.
  5. Admin Coaching reform is agreed upon.
Signed...


German organized crime

I recently saw that you have asked that this article be deleted. Why do you ask for this? Is it because you can't find any arrest records to link the people to crime? Just for reference, these people seem to be pretty powerful individuals, and people of their magnitude don't usually have petty arrest records.

Seeing is Believing

If you want verifiable evidence for the article German organized crime, perhaps you should investigate the matter firsthand by going to Granville, New York. If these people do exist, they'll be there. The place exists, perhaps someone should check it out.