User talk:Kernow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Non-gene reproduction

Thanks for the answers to some of my questions. I do understand at least some of the definition of gene (having gotten halfway thru a Mol. Bio. degree ~6 years ago), though I do think I probably was miscongealing the definitions of gene and cistron (though cistron is too short for what I was fully thinking of, I was thinking of that as well as the entire transcription frame product). Thanks also for clarifying which kind of gene is generally refered to in memetics.

I am uncertain whether you are fully correct in your answer to question number 5, but it has given me more to think about. A single symbol can represent multiple concepts, a single concept can be (if properly understood) represented by multiple perceptual schemes/frameworks/symbols. These might be considered different memes, probably analogs or workalikes. I seem to innately differentiate between concepts and shells (symbols) which hold them, something you indicate most memetics texts don't do. An analog of phenotypic vs genotypic. Or perhaps I've misunderstood, I'll have to reread and think about your responses a bit.

6)I don't think this question makes sense.

I was attempting to refer to whether the concept of memes (as derived from genes) is the best way to represent what it is memes attempt to explain. Overly minimal usage of language on my part, sorry. --Formerly the IP-address 24.22.227.53


Thanks for the responses, I shall look at it (even Dawkins, though he implies that I am insane in Unweaving the Rainbow: but do any of us really tie our life's hopes to the ultimate fate of the cosmos anyway? Of course we don't; not if we are sane.
 ;-P -- fortunately not all of them, and I expect the possibility of dying frustrated in these hopes.)

[edit] Re: Jamie Miller

Okay, I let him know (I was just sending him PMs through Flickr so I don't know his e-mail). This is the Google query I found it with:

"i just lost the game" daterange:2448713-2452000 -2006 -2005 -2004

Yeah, it was mostly luck... Ashibaka tock 22:50, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

He didn't get my e-mail address... I found his Flickr account after doing a separate (and similarly complicated) Google query. Ashibaka tock 21:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First references to the Game

First references I can remember to the game were probably in 2003... I've only been a participant since 2004.

Just a bunch of mostly students, some at the University of Limerick in Ireland. Various acquaintances "playing" the Game are now all around Ireland and the UK.

zoney ♣ talk 13:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC) Italic text

[edit] 7WTC

I see you added a video and a transcript to that article. Please see my comments on the talk page...I'm wondering where the transcript came from. Thanks! Rx StrangeLove 16:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Mind if I move these comments to the talk page? I have some concerns about the transcript...Rx StrangeLove 16:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:757engine.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:757engine.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:757engine.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:757engine.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you.

[edit] Spam

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. OhNoitsJamie Talk 05:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Last warning

You will be blocked if you add the link again, Jonty (and I'll be happy to request a check user to verify that this account is using the same IP as Jonty303 (talk · contribs), an account that was warned repeatedly for spamming. This is your last warning. OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD on the game

Would you please re-read WP:N and express your opinion on the afd whether the game passes the current version of WP:N? Sethie 21:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DRV

Your submission to DRV added no new information, you just added more verbage and argument to what you listed last time believing people misunderstood. Presumably if you didn't get the answer you wanted this time it would also be because people misunderstood, it doesn't work like that. It failed AFD on the basis of notability and verifiability. For notability the requirement if multiple non-trivial mentions in reliable sources. Evaluation of what constitutes a reliable source is fairly open as is what constitutes multiple and non-trivial (Part of the consideration of reliable sources is the fact checked part, something which student papers often lack). The AFD and previous DRVs didn't believe the sources provided met the standard, you can't just keep relisting until you get the result you want. On a different note even if the article were restored the couple of sources you have don't provide verifiability for the vast bulk of the article anyway. --pgk 14:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

As a side note you seem unfamiliar with wikipedia, talk posts go at the bottom of the page not the top. Use the + sign next to the "edit this page" tab on talk pages to add a new section. --pgk 15:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
The AFD does cover notability with various comments regarding it, although verifiability may be the primary cause lack of verifiability tends to also cause lack of notability, since many of the notability standards are predicated on non-trivial coverage in multiple independant reliable sources. As to why a given source may not be considered adequate, I cover that above. As one of the AFD commenters said for the Dutch source "The single foreign language article used in support of this article is not reliable - not a news article with proper vetting process, but a whimisical column;", WP:RS gives guidance on evaluating the reliability of sources. --pgk 17:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User pages

Can I draw your attention to the user page guidelines specifically "copies of other pages" - this space is not intended to indefinitely archive your preferred version of disputed or previously deleted content., I've deleted yours under speedy deletion criteria G4 - Recreation of deleted material --pgk 15:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] AfD nomination of Scrambles

I have nominated Scrambles, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scrambles. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?