Revision as of 11:30, 6 September 2007 editSambc (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,980 edits ←Added section: "One" as a gallicism← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:39, 6 September 2007 edit undoHoary (talk | contribs)Administrators77,789 edits →Gender-neutral proposal: burping in anticipationNext edit → | ||
Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
== Gender-neutral proposal == | == Gender-neutral proposal == | ||
] 15:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)]] | |||
Tim—You asked me to remind you that this debate is proceeding. It's ]. Please note that I've . I'm concerned at calls for this to be debated by "the broader community", which I see as an attempt to stymie the debate. I've suggested that links from anywhere to this MOS debate are just fine, but no, someone has called for it to be elsewhere (without saying where), and links provided in the opposite direction. I think this belongs at MOS talk. ] 01:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC) | Tim—You asked me to remind you that this debate is proceeding. It's ]. Please note that I've . I'm concerned at calls for this to be debated by "the broader community", which I see as an attempt to stymie the debate. I've suggested that links from anywhere to this MOS debate are just fine, but no, someone has called for it to be elsewhere (without saying where), and links provided in the opposite direction. I think this belongs at MOS talk. ] 01:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:39, 6 September 2007
Archived round about 30K. I will respond on your user talk page. I don't watch user talk pages, so I may or may not respond if you don't reply to me here.
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
Titan: liquids section
Do you think the liquids section needs a rewrite to lessen the "press release style" as Volcanopele called it? Serendious 09:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
para
"Since the solar photolysis irreversibly converts all of the atmospheric methane in hydrocarbons in a relatively short time compared to Titan’s age of about 50 My (Strobel, 2004, this volume), CH4 must then be continuously replenished from a local reservoir either on or under Titan’s surface."
try:
"Since the solar photolysis irreversibly converts all of the atmospheric methane in hydrocarbons in about 50 My, a relatively short time compared to Titan’s age, (Strobel, 2004, this volume), CH4 must then be continuously replenished from a local reservoir either on or under Titan’s surface."
I'm not sure if you meant "in hydrocarbons" or "into hydrocarbons."
No, I just think that science buffs as a rule aren't good writers. Facts not flair, as it were. Sorry; I thought you were asking me to correct that line. Didn't realise you'd quoted it from the text. Serendious 15:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Serendious 14:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to give your added para a go-over, but first I need to know...
Clouds have also been found over the south pole. While typically covering 1% of Titan's disk, outburst events have been observed in which the cloud cover rapidly expands.
To what? Serendious 14:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Nature
Good call, although as a mindless civilian, I don't have access to Nature on my home PC. Serendious 13:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- Ah now why'd ya have ta go and do that? :) I was about to write kudos for calling Titan a planet! I personally call it a planet too, but only to myself. So do you want me to do the ref? Serendious 14:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- re: "definitive evidence". This is one of those annoying instances when science reveals that it's about evidence, not proof. If the lead's changed, then the Liquids section should be changed too, but the issue is whether or not the evidence presented so far, compelling though it is, constitutes absolute proof. I dunno. I suppose it's about as certain as you can get, but even if it's 95 percent, is that enough to say, is? Serendious 06:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- You know, now I'm going slightly crazy thinking about that phrase. Language and science really don't mix. Best to say "half the size," really. Sorry to have to ask this, but are you sure that image is from Torola Macula? I got that image from a page claiming it was Genesa Macula, but it could have been wrong. Re: to date, I would say, as of August 2007, to keep the line from dating. Serendious 18:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Oops. Sorry; must have missed the history. I'll post the right guy. :( Hope there are no hard feelings. Serendious 19:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- You know, now I'm going slightly crazy thinking about that phrase. Language and science really don't mix. Best to say "half the size," really. Sorry to have to ask this, but are you sure that image is from Torola Macula? I got that image from a page claiming it was Genesa Macula, but it could have been wrong. Re: to date, I would say, as of August 2007, to keep the line from dating. Serendious 18:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- re: "definitive evidence". This is one of those annoying instances when science reveals that it's about evidence, not proof. If the lead's changed, then the Liquids section should be changed too, but the issue is whether or not the evidence presented so far, compelling though it is, constitutes absolute proof. I dunno. I suppose it's about as certain as you can get, but even if it's 95 percent, is that enough to say, is? Serendious 06:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- What's the harm? :-) I jumped the gun on Uranus and lost the nom, but I don't think it's delayed its renomination by more than a few days. Titan's been stuck in GA purgatory for as long as I've known it, and it should at least have a chance. Serendious 20:41, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Re: addition: polar region, or polar regions? Serendious 20:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- A quick purusal on Google suggests that Titan does have a prime meridian (according to one paper I viewed but could not read, the IAU established prime meridians for all the planets and satellites in 1982, though they must have revised it since then since I happen to know that a feature on Venus, called Eve, was chosen as its prime meridian after the Magellan mission). One paper said that Titan's prime meridian is on the side facing Saturn, which suggests that it is probably the line on Titan's surface which is closest to Saturn. Serendious 20:39, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Re: addition: polar region, or polar regions? Serendious 20:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- What's the harm? :-) I jumped the gun on Uranus and lost the nom, but I don't think it's delayed its renomination by more than a few days. Titan's been stuck in GA purgatory for as long as I've known it, and it should at least have a chance. Serendious 20:41, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Doesn't bother me, I just thought that was what Volcanopele wanted. Serendious 10:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Lion ?
Is work still happening at Lion or have you all given up? I'm in a hotel, and there's a question on my talk page about the links I pruned eons ago when you first started work; I suggested s/he raise it on the talk page, since I can't track down that video today, and that's the place to raise the question anyway. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'll chime in here - it is still happening but there's a frustrating couple of facts which need sourcing from a book or something offline...and a couple of other things...progressing though...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Haha got the schaller lion today... :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Quick input needed
Given the size of the Lion article - I'm wondeering how big to make the communication section. It is as brief as i could be now, but could be a helluva lot bigger....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
PS: The Scahller book also has some infon on Leopards in it for sprucing up that article cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
PPS: Circeus also gave me some input in the form of a quick to-do list on my talk page - more stuff! Have a look....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Luto
Hi Tim—Slightly concerned at the disjuncture between the conception of (the ever gentlemanly) RobertG and some of the reviewers at this FAC WRT referencing. At some stage, you may consider making a comment about this issue of interpreting the relevant FA criterion; or you may not. Tony 23:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Haaaaaaaa
Rumsfeld is giving Bush his daily briefing, and he finishes saying "Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed".
"Oh my god!", says the President. "That's terrible!"
Bush puts his head in his hands for a second as Rumsfeld and the rest of the staff watch on.
Finally, the President looks up and asks, "So how many is a Brazillian?"
Ba-doom tscch. Neil ム 10:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Nude FAR
Yep, that was one of those FFAs that had Gimmetrow and I chasing our tails for quite a while :-) Of course I'll leave the archiving for you; I half expected you to say something last month, thinking you might be "sentimentally" attached. Because that file is now linked at WP:FAS, which I've taken to updating month-end, I get anxious to get it done :-) Since I gave three weeks of my life to correcting FAS, I got kind of attached there, too. All right, back to Asperger (contibuting to the highest monthly edit count I've ever had, and completely exhausting work, will need extra time in review to smooth things over). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Someone added the AFD to the FFA page; we need to hear from Gimmetrow on that to make sure it doesn't mess up any scripts/bots. I started a section at Misplaced Pages talk:Former featured articles#Nude celebrities. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- oh my gosh, it's back :-) Nude celebrities on the Internet. Coredesat overturned him/herself (and correctly updated articlehistory) and RickBlock fixed the WP:FFA page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Ack. Raul closed Spoo, but the archiving is goofed up. It's halfway GimmeBotified, and he put it in August rather than September. Rather than messing with it myself, I'll leave a note to Gimmetrow to let him know it's halfway done, and that it should be fixed and moved to Sept. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Andrew FAR
So, are we supposed to vote now, or just continue discussion, or both? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. I have the paged saved (both the FARC and the article) so I'll know if something happens. Right now, I'm for demoting because no one has even discussed the problems with the article, let alone taken any action to the page since it was put up for review. My "keep" is based around someone doing something other than sitting around and hoping it goes away. Thanks for clarifying. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 11:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Gender-neutral proposal
Tim—You asked me to remind you that this debate is proceeding. It's here. Please note that I've implemented two compromises today. I'm concerned at calls for this to be debated by "the broader community", which I see as an attempt to stymie the debate. I've suggested that links from anywhere to this MOS debate are just fine, but no, someone has called for it to be elsewhere (without saying where), and links provided in the opposite direction. I think this belongs at MOS talk. Tony 01:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Spoo
The reason I asked is because the article is still technically marked as a featured article; I'm afraid someone will speedy close the AFD nomination. Punctured Bicycle 09:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
"One" as a gallicism
I've no idea if it's true or not, but if "one" is a gallicism, I imagine that it comes from the french pronoun "on", which is usually literally translated as "one", but used as "everyone" or occaisionally "anyone". For example, "on est dans le jardin" (that "le" might be wrong, I can't remember if it's masc or fem) would be used conversationally to mean "everyone is in the garden", for example when greeting someone as they arrive for a party.
Just thought you might like to know. SamBC(talk) 11:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Category: