User talk:Alvestrand/Archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 My archive 2 Boscovich 3 All Music Guide 4 Tim Baines 5 Mackay School of Earth Sciences and Engineering 6 The Long Way Home (Ebert novel) 7 Tita Betty's Children's Show 8 Temple Hayes 9 Citation Improvements 10 Why remove count history from Wikipedia:Dead-end pages? 11 Redirect of The art factory 12 ArbCom 13 Hi 14 Follow Up on a Previous Edit 15 Trustworthy Repositories Audit 16 Finding people in Find-A-Grave lists 17 Unity 18 Larry Page fortune 19 Please see my comments on Talk:Unity Church 20 Barnstar 21 MOH problem 22 Primordiax 23 Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Medal of Honor recipients 24 Your recent edit to Comparison of Windows and Linux 25 Your recent edit to Standardization of Office Open XML 26 Find a grave links

[edit] My archive

which should start with a 2007-12-23 post.

[edit] Boscovich

Hi, I have in my hand a historical paper on Roger Joseph Boscovich 1711-1787, Studies in his life and work on the 250th anniversary of his birth. He was the original inventor of relativity and atomism. He did influence Mileva Maric's work, as such credit is due where credit is due. Feel free to read up on Boscovich to find of his older theories which paved the way to the notions of atoms and the relativity of time and space. There are a couple of books out there some in English most in Latin. I would prefer that you leave the Mileva Maric-Boscovich connection in her Wikipedia entry, for relativity is truly an old Boscovichian idea. Do note that up until now most Western scholars are truly unaware of his works and his significant contributions to science- bcrostro@rice.edu (physicist, technical writer, and enthusiast of scientific history. As of yet there are a pile of letters writtern in Croatian, French and Latin that must still be translated. I'm trying to get in touch with a number of physics societies to help translate some of these. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.241.124.87 (talk)

If you can document a reliable source that claims, explicitly, to document that Bosovich influenced Maric, feel free to add it. Note that it's still controversial how much Maric influenced Einstein. All information that is about Bosovich alone needs to be added to the Bosovich article, not to the Maric article. And do remember to sign your talk page posts. --Alvestrand (talk) 21:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] All Music Guide

Just to note, Allmusic.com is probably the most reliable online source for popular music (though it does occasionally err). In fact, it's given as one of the top source suggestions at WP:MUSIC. Chubbles (talk) 12:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

It's better than I thought then - the advice at [1] seems to indicate that one should be careful about using them. Thanks for the opposite advice! --Alvestrand (talk) 13:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tim Baines

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Tim Baines, 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) 06:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mackay School of Earth Sciences and Engineering

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Mackay School of Earth Sciences and Engineering, 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) 00:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Long Way Home (Ebert novel)

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article The Long Way Home (Ebert novel), 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) 18:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tita Betty's Children's Show

Sorry about that. I used Twinkle to nominate it and I have a habit of just adding the template using that. Thanks for cleaning it up. Pinkadelica (talk) 06:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Temple Hayes

I verified this (baseball) fact with Carlton Benton at ASA - The National Governing Body of Softball. Temple Hayes has a certificate verifying this in her office. http://www.asasoftball.com/ ALSO, I edited the first paragraph to change the tone. Jane Kennedy (talk) 16:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Jane Kennedy I originally entered this data. Can you take the notes off. Anything else I need to do. I'm trying to follow AP style and guidelines. Thanks Jane Kennedy (talk) 16:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Jane Kennedy

See talk page. I still think the style has a POV problem. --Alvestrand (talk) 13:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citation Improvements

HI. I thought I'd just let you know that there is a more specific tag for reference cleanups. I've replaced the {{wikify}} tag with a {{citation style}} tag in the Gerald Francis O'Keefe article. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 13:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Alvestrand (talk) 13:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why remove count history from Wikipedia:Dead-end pages?

sorry, i didn't know that's what you were doing, i just thought someone had been editing and had done it wrong! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katsp8 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect of The art factory

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on The art factory, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because The art factory is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting The art factory, 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. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 03:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom

Thanks, and if you'd like to offer a statement at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance, or at the related evidence/workshop pages, please feel free. The more different opinions that can be brought in, the easier it is for the Arbs to ensure that they're getting a well-rounded view of the situation.  :) This page may also be helpful: WP:CASE. --Elonka 20:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Hi Alvestrand. It seems that you have been recently invited by Elonka to give your opinion on the subject of the Franco-Mongol alliance. I have been developing content on this subject for about 6 months now, and Elonka has been systematically harassing me, trying to have her POV prevail that "no alliance occured". I am only asking that, per Wikipedia:NPOV, all significant academic point of views be represented. I invite you to read the disputed content for yourself so that you can have an informed opinion [2]. Regards (nice to hear you're from Norway... we're on the same time zone). PHG (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see much sign that you have been seriously considering the possibilities that:

• A 200K article about an obscure subject where no consensus exists in the historical community is inappropriate for Wikipedia
• That your actions in promoting and defending your viewpoint in the article may be inappropriate for Wikipedia
• That you may in fact be wrong.

Until I see signs of you seriously considering those possibilities, my contention that you should be barred from Wikipedia editing stands. --Alvestrand (talk) 06:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't you think there are plenty of subjects for which there is no consensus in the historical community? At Wikipedia, we simply deal with that with Wikipedia:NPOV policy: all significant points of view should be mentionned, in a balanced manner. This article is 200k because it is highly documented, with a very large amount of academic sources on the subject. Everytime I tried to split the article to make it smaller, Elonka pursued me for POV:fork.

I believe I am perfectly entitled to defend my point of view. I have always been welcoming of others' opinions, and actually the 200k article incoporates many alternative view, especially introduced by Elonka over a period of 6 months (like all the alliance/submission disclaimers and a lot more).

I can't be wrong since all I contribute to Wikipedia is from proper published sources. There is no "wrong" in reporting what the academic community has to say about a given subject. My own personal opinion is totally irrelevant.

Thank you for your kind attention on this subject. Elonka is a master at harassing other users and at trying to make them look bad. Best regards. PHG (talk) 01:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I think my point has been amply demonstrated. --Alvestrand (talk) 09:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Follow Up on a Previous Edit

I added a link to a rather extensive article on the history of the Santa Cruz County Symphony. The newspaper that published it has been covering the entertainment scene in the area for 33 years, so they should qualify as a reliable source on that subject. Could you take a look and see if it sufficiently addresses the sourcing concerns that you raised? Thanks in advance. Palmpilot900 (talk) 21:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trustworthy Repositories Audit

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Trustworthy Repositories Audit, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification (TRAC). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Finding people in Find-A-Grave lists

Thanks and I will make the corrections you mentioned. I do have a follow-up question though. I noticed in the case of a couple that the there were disambiguous pages which contained a further disambiguous page. For example Adams contains a link to Adams (surname) which further disambiguates to Andrew Adams. Is this really the correct way to do this? It seems like we are taking our readers down a rabbit hole. I also noticed that some names are duplicated between the Adams (surname) page and the specific name page such as the Andrew Adams page mentioned above. This also seems odd to me. Thanks for the help.--Kumioko (talk) 19:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

It seems odd to me too, but there appears to be no consistent across-Wikipedia scheme around. The Adams page contains links to diverse types of information, so it's distinct from a human name disambigutation page; the Andrew Adams page of course needs to exist as a target for links that are entered without disambiguation, and for people who type that name in the box to the left and hit "go". After the failure of the grand experiment of "List of people by name", which attempted to list ALL persons on Wikipedia, manually, I've concluded that long lists like Adams (surname) are unmaintainable and should be abandoned. But that's only my opinion... and I don't consider it important enough that I'll go and delete a list like Adams (surname) - I'll just ignore it.

Don't know if that helped.... --Alvestrand (talk) 22:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

It does help thanks.--Kumioko (talk) 22:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unity

What point ,Unity is outside the Christian mainstream, Does not believe Jesus is lord and saviour but a prophet. Its history is deeply rooted in the New Thought movement of the 1800s. Take a look at the New Thought article unity falls under new religious movements.72.225.239.38 (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice to have you talking at last, Yankee. I don't think the term "Christian denomination" needs to be limited to the "Christian mainstream", whatever that is. I consider the Mormons too to be "outside the mainstream" - yet I don't want to take away their self-identification as "Christian". Now argue that on the article's talk page.... Wikipedia is all about discussion to achieve consensus, not unilateral edits of what you don't agree with. --Alvestrand (talk) 03:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Larry Page fortune

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_billionaires_%282008%29 Information pulled from the recently updated billionaires list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.109.75 (talk) 00:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Then cite that (or the source that cites) as a a reference. Don't leave the 2007 Fortune article in. --Alvestrand (talk) 05:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please see my comments on Talk:Unity Church

section 24.4 [3]. Low Sea (talk) 04:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The Invisible Barnstar
		Thank you for your continued work and assistance on Wikipedia:Copyright problems, reviewing copyright status and generally cleaning up articles that need attention or a referee. Your good work goes unseen unless someone disagrees ;) Jeepday (talk) 12:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Treasuring this on my user page.... --Alvestrand (talk) 13:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MOH problem

Thanks I'll fix that today--Kumioko (talk) 13:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Primordiax

I know you don't think you are being harsh, but please, before you think Primordiax is not a noteworthy game, you really need to do a little bit of research in the online gaming industry.

There are tens of thousands of people very excited about this game. It seems that maybe you are not very familiar with the gaming business, and that is fine, but Primordiax is the next game from a very reputable and very old gaming company. That is a big deal in the gaming business.

Cambios (talk) 01:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Forgive me, but you don't seem terribly familiar with Wikipedia.... if you think so, add the references. You claim to know that there are tens of thousands of people excited about this game - cite your reputable source that makes you think so, and the article will be fine. Finding the source is hard for me - it should be trivially easy for you. Go do it! --Alvestrand (talk) 17:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I already added a few references. This is an Unreleased Game. I would suggest that you surf Wiki a bit and look at other Unreleased Game pages. They tend to have a small amount of general information. That is why the Unreleased Game tag exists. The other tags you are adding are superfluous. Everything you are noting is already included in the meaning of the Unreleased Game tag. Not every game company engages in massive amounts of Vaporware tactics by bribing game sites into releasing 9000 previews. Some game companies focus on making their actual games. That means the information out there before a release is limited. When a 12+ year old MMO/MUD company is making a new game, that is notable. When there is actually some information out there to back it up, that satisfies the Wiki requirements. And once again, by including the "Unreleased Video Game" tag, it is already known that information is limited and more will be forthcoming as the release of the game approaches.

I am not trying to be argumentative, and sorry about my talk page. It was getting clogged with a rather asinine discussion that was related to some silly sports team fanboys. It was painful to find actually worthwhile comments like yours. :) Cambios (talk) 08:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Opinions differ, it seems. The {{Future game}} tag says "Please do not add speculation to this article, and remember to cite a published source for details", with "published source" linked to Wikipedia:Verifiability, which says in "Self-published and questionable sources in articles about themselves" that such is acceptable as long as "the article is not based primarily on such sources". At the moment, the Primordiax article seems to be primarily based on company-published material.

As a contrast, check out Dragon Quest IX Hoshizora no Mamoribito (a random pick from the "unreleased games" category, which is primarily based on IGN articles and interviews in publications not published by the company. --Alvestrand (talk) 12:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Medal of Honor recipients

I wanted to let you know that I have submitted List of Medal of Honor recipients to be a Featured List. If you want to take a look and leave a comment please do.--Kumioko (talk) 17:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edit to Comparison of Windows and Linux

This edit reverted several edits to the article. I'm assuming this was accidental. I have reverted your edit. WalterGR (talk | contributions) 07:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

One of those was intentional, the rest was not. I've re-added the one I intended. Surprised that no edit conflict was reported! --Alvestrand (talk) 07:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. WalterGR (talk | contributions) 07:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edit to Standardization of Office Open XML

I noticed that you added a reference to a password-protected site marked "ISO NB members access". Are you a member of an ISO NB? Thanks, WalterGR (talk | contributions) 07:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm a member of the Norwegian NB committee on OOXML and related matters. All committee members are given the password to this site. I'm sure there are copies floating in the wild - if not findable, you can request your national representative to send you a copy. --Alvestrand (talk) 07:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Find a grave links

I have created several Medal of Honor articles and I was going to add the F.A.G ref but I wanted to clarify. Once I do do I simply delete it off the list or should I line it out and let someone else scrub the list. Also, I notice that you have been putting in some dates as 1911-11-21. I recommend changing the format to November 11, 1911. Most of the articles do not use the military date system and it sometimes confuses people.--Kumioko (talk) 22:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Just delete it - there's few people scrubbing the lists, so if you leave it, it might be a long time until someone notices.

WRT date format, if you put [[ ]] around it, Wikipedia will format it to the reader's preferred date format; I happen to like ISO dates, because they have the most important stuff to the left. --Alvestrand (talk) 05:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)