User talk:Jsd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Jsd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 16:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] source

Could you please put references to your sources on trireme. preferably as footnotes. Thx Wandalstouring 19:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


I added a footnote as requested. It's just high-school physics. Jsd 03:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Not enough. If you have to calculate it in a physics exam, you need to show the whole calculation, so just act likewise AND DO SUCH THINGS ON THE DISCUSSION PAGE FIRST! Afterwards several other editors will look at your thoughts, correct errors and agree/disagree. afterwards insert such comments, otherwise you violate Wikipedia policy of no OR. I'm sorry, but in cases an editor does not agree with a recognized source, he needs to present very well sourced information. Wandalstouring 07:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Multiplying one number by another is not a "physics exam". Dividing one number by another is not "original research". Using information presented in the same article a few paragraphs earlier or a few paragraphs later (and not considered controversial) does not constitute "unsourced information". Jsd 15:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Just give me the the citation and THE ANCIENT AUTHOR you are refering to for your claim that he wrote totally wrong things. As long as you do not write clearly the formula you use it is not acceptable, our ordinary reader must be able to understand. Wandalstouring 16:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I think we have solved this issue now. If you are interested in contributing some physics to history articles I do appreciate this. for example bow and crossbow could have a better explanation of Compound bow vs D-shaped or recurve bows. As one can see from geometry, the accelaration of the sinew decreases for the traditional systems the more the bow relaxes, not so for compound. fom this you could explain why for short distances very heavy projectiles (arrows) were used (efficiency). Wandalstouring 16:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Significant figures

I like your added section. Very well done. One point: It is usually better not to contradict other parts of the article. Better to change what is wrong than to say "A is true" and later say "A is not true, B is true". But still, I think your addition was a vast improvement to the article. --Slashme 13:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)