Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:19, 2 November 2010

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

• /About me
• /Plaudits

Talkback

Biography of Ælfwaru (d. 1007)

Francis Nepveu

Hi, if you have a moment can you find some sources for this/improve the text?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:11, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

"François Nepveu" is a better bet as name. I have done the interwiki to the frWP page, not that it has so much. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Bishops of Meath (Roman Catholic)

Category:Bishops of Meath (Roman Catholic), which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kittybrewster ☎ 11:07, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Heads up about an RfC

Please note that there's a new discussion at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure in which you may wish to comment. It is expected to close in about a week. You have received this message because you participated in a similar discussion (2009 AC2 RfC) last year.  Roger 05:28, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Giovanni Francisco Vigani

On 30 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Giovanni Francisco Vigani, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:06, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Cassels & the Shapley-Folkman lemma

Dear Charles,

I remember that you had studied with Cassels , so I would alert you that David Eppstein has written an article on the Shapley-Folkman lemma, to whose literature Cassels has contributed an elegant article and a book of economics --- both left-hand pieces. You might enjoy looking at the Cassels article cited.

(Also, there is a brief note about J. W. S. Cassels's lectures in Peter Whittle's memoir of the Statistical Laboratory.)

Best regards, Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 05:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually I remembered something Cassels had said about that work - I did see the article; I don't think he felt it was at all profound. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Not profound, just insightful and easy to read. :) Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 08:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Here's a Cassels story, explaining some of my interest in Vigani (see the DYK above). There is a Vigani Room in Trinity College, Cambridge, and Cassels took me with a visiting mathematician there, to drink sherry. The sherry was there because J. K. Galbraith gave Trinity some money, to spend on something "they couldn't otherwise afford". Afterwards Cassels told me about counterexamples he had found to the mathematician's work. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:59, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Henry Percy, 5th Earl of Northumberland

Please see Talk:Henry Percy, 5th Earl of Northumberland, I think we had already put this to bed, but perhapse you would like to move your comment from my talk page over to that page so there is a record of you point where others can see it if this comes up again in the future. -- PBS (talk) 18:00, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Done. Charles Matthews (talk) 18:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

your Census post

Charles, could you slightly clarify "The tool I have mentioned above" in your 'Census' post on the DNB talk page. (I ask here so as not to amplify another thread on a project talk page which I expect to become monstrous in size!). Sorry not to be able to make the Cambridge meetup, btw. Next time I hope. Best, Dsp13 (talk) 16:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

See Wikisource thread. The tool is nice to use, but touchy like everything that drives the toolserver to its limits. http://en.wikisource.org/User:Charles_Matthews#Tools for more. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

'Tis indeed good, though I find integrating DNB material sensitively into an existing WP bio takes me an enormous time! Dsp13 (talk) 16:58, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

RE:CSD

I am not sure whether my BOLDNESS is enough to start such a complex subject. It is nice to see an editor who uses WP:AGF. I wish all the best in the future. Many Regards, Yousou (report) 17:14, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Kehrli new POV dispute

You were involved in an arbitration a couple years ago. ] A nearly identical behavior and dispute has arisen. ] I was wondering if you could pop in there and try to clearly define the scope and purpose of Misplaced Pages to Kehrli ] as apparently the outcome of the last dispute and the resulting ban did not make such things clear. To summarize: He/she has chosen a different obscure unit-like scaling procedure and is trying to synthesize a well defined unit based on selective use of a few literature examples in combination with the widely accepted rules of metrology. Very elegant work that might be a good idea, but novel nonetheless, and thus not for Misplaced Pages. I am not a primary participant in the dispute. He/she has also been going over much of the material that he/she was banned from (for 1 year) and is persisting in the course of action that he/she was banned for now that the ban is expired. I have not been policing these actions and the pages have fallen into subtly novel/POV pages.--Nick Y. (talk) 20:06, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Charles: we all agree that Misplaced Pages needs to use "standard notation". We just do not agree what standard notation means.

• In my opinion "standard notation" means the consensus notation established by the Physicist IUPAP red book, the Chemists IUPAC green book, the International Standard Organization ISO 31, and the standards of the specialists in metrology (= the scientist that study measurment in general) which you find in the International vocabulary of metrology.
• In the opinion of Nick and Kermit "standard notation" is the jargon that is used by some people (not by all people) in their narrow field of science, mass spectrometry and that will not be understood by the wider public because it often contradicts the consensus notation established by the Physicist IUPAP red book, the Chemists IUPAC green book, the International Standard Organization ISO 31, and the standards of the specialists in metrology (= the scientist that study measurment in general) which you find in the International vocabulary of metrology.

In short: They are pushing the jargon of a part of the mass spectrometrists, which are roughly 10'000 people worldwide. I am defending the terminology that is the international consensus, and also is used by some in their field (which I can prove).

Kehrli (talk) 19:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Kehrli is using his interpretation of the tertiary sources IUPAP red book/IUPAC green book/ISO 31 to justify rejecting all of the scientific literature on Kendrick mass (dozens of publications in the past decade). The new unit of mass that Kehrli has defined is original research and inconsistent with multiple verifiable sources. --Kkmurray (talk) 22:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I am not rejecting any scientific literature on Kendrick mass analysis. I am just saying that most of it is written in a sloppy jargon that is not understandable by the wider public because it is not in line with the terminology according to the scientific consensus and that in Misplaced Pages we should use the terminology of those papers that are actually in line with the consensus terminology. Kehrli (talk) 23:12, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Kkmurray is lying: the unit in my article Kendrick (unit) is defined here: . Kehrli (talk) 23:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC)