This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sarvagnya (talk | contribs) at 21:41, 30 January 2007 (→Conundrum: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:41, 30 January 2007 by Sarvagnya (talk | contribs) (→Conundrum: re)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) |
|---|
| 24 December 2024 |
|
The Reduced Gravity Walking Simulator was a facility developed by NASA in the early 1960s to study human movement under simulated lunar gravity conditions. It was located at NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia and was designed to prepare astronauts for the Moon landings during the Apollo program. The simulator was tilted at a 9.5-degree angle from the vertical and test subjects were suspended on their side by cables at the same angle. This set-up allowed the trainees to walk along the surface while experiencing only one-sixth of Earth's gravity. It was also used to study the physiological effects on the astronaut's body during movement. In total, 24 astronauts used the simulator to train for lunar missions, including all three astronauts of the Apollo 1 mission. This photograph, taken in 1963, shows a test subject being suited up by two technicians on the Reduced Gravity Walking Simulator.Photograph credit: NASA
Archive – More featured pictures...
Misplaced Pages vandalism information
(abuse log)
Low to moderate level of vandalism
2.03 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot 09:10, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Deletion Review - Matt Norman
Hi there Could you please review your deletion of an article I put up that you deleted.
Article Matt Norman
Below is the opinion of another administrator? Thanks in advance. Filmnews2007 05:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Re. Please tell me why you have deleted my entry - third time?
Hello. I believe that the article in question is Matt Norman. I did not delete this, but after checking the deletion log I can inform that it has been deleted three times by three different administrators. The reason stated for deletion was the speedy deletion criterion A7. This criterion states that an article may be speedy deleted if it provides no assertion of notability of the subject. After viewing the last version of the article I believe that it did assert notability. I recommend you to take this article to the deletion review and try to have the deletion overturned. I hope this helps. Regards,--Húsönd 12:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Deletion Review
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Matt Norman. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Filmnews2007 06:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume II, Issue 1 - January 2007
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
|
Newyorkbrad's RfA
Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 19:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Gandhian economics
Do you know something about Gandhian economics] ? deeptrivia (talk) 03:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've created this article after some research and nominated it at T:DYK. Please have a look in case there are any errors. Rama's arrow (3:16) 17:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Add the article J. C. Kumarappa to that. -- Szvest - 18:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your support
 |
As you set out for Ithaka, hope the voyage is long Don't expect Ithaka to make you rich. Ithaka gave you the marvelous journey |
Hey
Hey Nirav, I looked at ANI and saw your concerns. For some reason the site's not working for me. Just wondering if you could do a quick check to see whether there is any mention of me on their threads, thanks. Nobleeagle 05:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Taj Mahal RFC
- I've filed an RFC relating to the Taj Mahal at Talk:Taj Mahal#Request for Comment: Inclusion of minority points of view. Your comments would be most welcome. Joopercoopers 18:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Energy: world resources and consumption
Could you please look at Energy: world resources and consumption and comment if it is ready to be a featured article? Thank you for your help.
Frank van Mierlo 12:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to review the article. Frank van Mierlo 20:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Fellow wrestling fan
Yo yo yo, pop a 40 and check your rollies! It's ImmortalKaine! I really don't watch WWE that much. TNA all the way! I am the self proclaimed Mr. TNA and the resident TNA Authorite in the WWE Fan Club on www.serebiiforums.com (same name, currently banned til 1st of feb for a stupid reason)
Eddie Guerrero died 1 day after my birthday. My b-day is Nov. 12th (1987) so it was a shock when I went on the WWE site the day after my b-day to see eddie had died.--The guy who stole your watch,ImmortalKaine 06:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman: External Links
Hi, Can you please update the url of http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/*.HTM to http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/*.htm . Thanks. zbd 10:35, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Help Misplaced Pages: WikiProject Protected areas of India
I would be glad if u help us in Misplaced Pages: WikiProject Protected areas of India. None of us are much experienced, we need some experienced persons like u. Kindly review the Project and do some inclusion or correction if u feel, see its talk page for more and specially in craeting the templates. Amartyabag (Talk) 11:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Ads
This anon is adding a link to a travel site to lots of India articles: . Arrow740 08:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Nadirali
Does these posts canvassing for edit-warriors and this post to my talkpage constitute harrassment? Rumpelstiltskin223 21:22, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I will do exactly as you say :) Rumpelstiltskin223 21:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
ip attacker
Hi. regarding your block of this ip , he appears to have resurrected from another ip from the same domain and is attacking my user page .
This has been going on for a while:
I was confused as to who he culd be. Then he made an interesting post to Sir Nick's talk page:
leading to the conclusion that these ips are all the sock of banned user Mustafa Bhai. Rumpelstiltskin223 22:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have some more things on User_talk:Aksi_great#hi and User:Bakasuprman/87. Bakaman 03:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
accusations
What are you accusing me of? A troll(or more correctly a sock/meatpuppet) starts destoying the work of 3 descent editors and you accuse me.If you dont like my edits then we should get a neutral admin to deal with this.I was enraged by the comments you made on the Pakistan discussion page.If you don't like my style of editing then,let's ask a neutral party to intervine.
Blocking every single user you disagree with will only bring more attention to this issue in my opinion.Nadirali نادرالی
It is incivil of you to accuse me so randomly and without basing your accusations on any evidence.Please see wikipedia no personal attacks policy.Comment on my edits not on my ethnicity or personality.Nadirali نادرالی
Your block of User:MinaretDk
Hello. I noticed you blocked MinaretDk for 48 hours and did not leave a detailed rationale for your block, or even a notice of it, on that user's talk page. Please do so now. It is unreasonable to expect administrators considering his or her unblock requests to wade through all of their recent contributions to find the specific incidents/behaviour for which you executed the block. If you cannot provide such a rationale, then I would be inclined to unblock them. - Mark 04:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Thank you. - Mark 04:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Conundrum
Hi there,
I am almost at the end of my tether with bickering on the Talk:India page. A number of editors, some well-intentioned (like user:Indianstar and user:AJ-India) and others of uncertain intentions (like user:Sarvagnya) would like to add (or, have already added and which I then reverted) various portions of text to many sections of the India page, an FA. These proposed edits, all initially made by user:Indianstar are not minor (i.e. they are of the size of a small paragraph), and they have not been discussed before. I have tried to start discussion going on the Talk:India page, for example: see Example1, or Example2 (the title of this section has been changed retroactively by user:Sarvagnya from "History section" to "Fowler's High-handed Reverts"). The problem as I see it is that the edits are either controversial, or cover old ground, or too listy. I get the feeling that these editors are not really interested in discussing the issues because they keep accusing me of "making a mountain out of molehill" or semantic obfuscation. Their view is that their edits are common-sense and 1 or 2 KB or text is no problem, and that no time should be wasted on discussion, especially elaborate discussion like mine. Here is an example of some responses: Example3 and Example4. In the background, user:Sarvagnya seems to be egging on the other editors to go ahead and add the reverted material again before the discussion is complete. I am trying to hold on until Nichalp returns from his vacation on February 4, but in light of user:Sarvagnya's unmitigated hostility, I am concerned. She/He has used uncivil language consistently. Here are some examples of language directed at me:
- "Will someone do me a favour by drilling it into his skull ..."
- "hiding behind an admin to justify juvenile editing practices ..."
- "Just improve it. Dammit."
In spite of my civil reminder to desist (see here), she/he has continued with his uncivil language and earlier today she/he changed the title of the discussion section retroactively from "History Section" to "Fowler's High-handed Reverts". (The discussion section incidentally had been started by me.) I am trying to keep my cool, but it is frustrating to hear such language consistently, when most of me, judging from the level sophistication of her/his writing, is itching to say something. Any advice will be welcome. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Wow! Another mischevous act of misrepresentation of my stand by Fowler. Anyway first things first. Talking of decorum or the lack of it on my part that Fowler seems to be harping on, may I remind him that he has called me a vandal for no reason other than his own ignorance of the rules.
His condescending edit summaries, couple of which I have pointed out on the India talk page, smack of unbridled contempt for the efforts of other editors; not to mention his ignorance of several WP policies.
And indulging in revert after revert after revert without any explanation whatsoever is like dealing a slap on the other editors face with scant respect for his/her efforts. Forget simple reverts, for someone who acts so very 'holier-than-thou', did he even bother to let people know before he rolled the page back two months?!
Its one thing to play to a gallery of admins and another to not lose sight of objectivity. He royally betrays his misplaced priorities at every step. He seems not to or not willing to understand that issues like style, formatting, grammar, article size etc., are NOT excuses to blank content or roll pages back two months!!
For example, there was this content about G4 and India's bid for a permanent seat that Indianstar had added. A bid for the permanent seat is an extremely significant and notable fact about India as is its space programme and its nuclear programme. So says commonsense. But not Fowler. He simply goes ahead and blanks it out offering no explanation other than another of his ill informed edit summaries(rv content that was added without discussion!!).
And when other editors decide that they will brook no more nonsense and demand an explanation of him, he comes back and sheepishly says that Indianstar's version was too wordy and that he'd have no objection if the same was mentioned more concisely as they've done on Japan!! So in effect, he has blanked out(vandalised??) content which even he agrees with, simply because the fact wasnt worded well??! What does he think he's doing! Has he even heard of cpedit?
And it is not like I am taking exception to his reverts because I have some sinister agenda. I've observed his editing behaviour since the last two months. And I see a disturbing and disruptive pattern and that is precisely why I've said what I've said. Its not like I am against every revert he does. Some, like the one he did today(the Afghan historian one) are certainly justified. But such ones are very few and far between considering that he has dozens of reverts to his name (counting just just this one article) in the short time that he's been on WP.
Sample the facts that he's blanked out:
- India's bid for a permanent seat
- India's nuclear capability
- India's successful space programme. and many many many more.
Explanations offered : NONE. None until fellow editors took him to task. Sarvagnya 21:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Just saw your message. Fowler's high handed reverts, blanking of content and unilateral rollbacks have been as uncivil and unprofessional as it gets. And can you please point out where I've edit warred with him. If anything, I've been patient and not undone even one of his reverts even though I take serious exception to it. Thanks. Sarvagnya 21:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- There has been an RfC of sorts on Talk:India for the last couple of days and both Indianstar and AJ India have disapproved of Fowler's editing habits. Both have indicated that Fowler merely keeps splitting hairs and making mountains out of molehills. Chanakyathegreat has also in the recent past disapproved of Fowler's blanking/reverts. I am sure there are others too. Many I guess are too tired to even comment there. An article can be optimised for prose, size etc., only after content has been added not before. Blanking out legitimate content simply because it is too wordy or has bad grammar is disruption if not vandalism. Sarvagnya 21:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I pray that you not lose sight of the real issue while focusing on my 'incivility'. Apart from the couple of "dammit"s, I've been very sane and civil throughout. And his edit summaries that sound like "hey you!.. i trashing your content coz you didnt discuss this ahead of time.." are extremely uncivil. Far worse than civility issues, his editing habits are extremely disruptive. Even Indianstar made the observation that thanks to Fowler, hardly any productive editing has taken place on the article in the past couple of months. Sarvagnya 21:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I surely cant be faulted for being incivil to a vandal(if that is what WP calls someone who blanks legitimate content like Fowler) or a disruptive user. If anything, I've been kind to fault by not slapping him with {test} tags for vandalism and such. Sarvagnya 21:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I pray that you not lose sight of the real issue while focusing on my 'incivility'. Apart from the couple of "dammit"s, I've been very sane and civil throughout. And his edit summaries that sound like "hey you!.. i trashing your content coz you didnt discuss this ahead of time.." are extremely uncivil. Far worse than civility issues, his editing habits are extremely disruptive. Even Indianstar made the observation that thanks to Fowler, hardly any productive editing has taken place on the article in the past couple of months. Sarvagnya 21:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)