User talk:Maury Markowitz/Archive Aug 2007

Copyedit from my page: "FYI, I have had many many comments in GA and FA that linking to dates should only be done if the date in question is an important one that likely will have a link back. IE, a famous battle is likely to be linked to from a date page, and should thus optionally link back. Other dates should generally be left unlinked, they seem to result in complaints from the reviewers. Maury 18:37, 16 July 2007 (UTC)"[reply]

Hi Maury, I know that there have been discussions in the past on various forums about the idea of linking dates, eg. 15 July 2007 written as 15 July 2007 so that users who have preferences set for dates could read the dates in their preferred form. I also have noted that the 15 July aviation subset has also appeared and been the source of commentary and discussion. What you suggest is the best method of showing dates is

• 15 July 2007

unless the date is especially notable in itself? FWIW |:¬) Bzuk 19:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates containing a month and a day: If a date includes both a month and a day, then the date should almost always be linked to allow readers' date preferences to work, displaying the reader's chosen format. The day and the month should be linked together, and the year should be linked separately if present. - BillCJ 00:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sigh one more reason to give up the GA reviews... Maury 12:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Maury, I did a bit of work on this article. Take a look and see what you think. |:¬) Bzuk 18:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Congrats Maury, I see you've got the GA! See you in TO next week. Bzuk 12:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on the Tomahawk page! I need to get some time and sit down and really work on that entry again!--Mike Searson 04:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hi, I was simply hoping that the sentence "The Pioneer Explorer Collaboration is expecting to address this concern around June 2007." would be updated. The information is now useless to anyone reading the article. Has it been addressed? Is there a new date? Capuchin 06:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Ms Markowitz, for defending me on Ryulong's talk page although with regards to his "temporary" insanity, I don't think he was ever all there.

YourLord

Be sure to understand that I'll be watching your future edits even more closely than Ryulong's. The difference is fundamental though; only one of you has the admin bit. But hey, I have it too... behave! :-) Maury 12:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you my dear Maury. I shall try.

YourLord

Maury, What did you to upset BillCJ so badly?

THANKS! I hope the dude will settle down after his block this time, but I guess we'll see. - BillCJ 15:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has he been using socks or other IP's as well? Maury 17:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, beforehand anyway, on the SR-71 Blackbird pages. User:68.110.244.75, User:68.244.202.255, User:68.244.199.32, User:68.245.48.85, and User:68.245.60.14.

He started going after me on talk pages after user:Akradecki s-protected the SR-71 page. Most of the whole story is at Talk:SR-71 Blackbird#No losses, but I'll give you more details if you need it. He does appear to have engaged in vandalism on other pages, which is why I have treated this as vandalsoism. - BillCJ 18:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. Ok, I'll start taking a look at the other accounts too. Time to go find the ban hammer... Maury 18:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm again adding the spam tag to First Class

Here are just a few examples...

The article refers to a "superior BBS" . "SoftArc had grown into a major Mac software vendor" How many sales? What's the definition of "major" "has over 10 million users " - not cited.

"By the mid-1990s the product was used for the vast majority of Mac BBSes, and their popularity only increased with the introduction of a Microsoft Windows client." - Again no citation

All true. I will remove "superior". SA was the largest e-mail vendor on the Mac. That's "major", aty least on the mac. 10-million could be removed I guess. "Vast majority", between 2 out of 3 and 3 our of 4 Mac BBS's were running FC. In terms of users it was even higher. Citation = me, having made most of these sales (thousands and thousands). Maury 18:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maury, as a complete offshoot, I have been doing some editing on Amelia Earhart and associated articles that deal with this iconic aviator/aviatrix (depending on the term in vogue). Since you have been successful in gaining the good article recommendation for the "Queen of the Hurricanes," I wonder if you could help me in looking over the Earhart article or in posting it for peer review? FWIW, you are certainly a great admin, judging by the edits I have seen. (Is that buttering you up enough? [:¬} Bzuk 16:32, 5 August 2007 (UTC).)[reply]

Yikes, are you kidding?! That should have been FA ages ago. It's one of those examples of where the wiki article absolutely trashes every other generalized source out there. With the exception of books dedicated to the topic there's really nothing like it, and even in terms of web sites dedicated to the topic, none of them comes close in terms of NPOV and sticking to the facts. Sure, I'd be happy to do a peer review, perhaps that might be useful. Maury 21:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am organizing a new meetup in Toronto where it will be more convinent for everyone than the current one. Please provide suggestions and feedbacks on the talk page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

I created a page for the Continental hyper could you look it over and add to it? Idsnowdog 15:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for filling in the info on the Continental! Idsnowdog 23:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Could you please explain what it was with this guy? I was involved in this whole SR-71 thing and it's very confusing to me. Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 22:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hello - I looked at your contributions to the Regional airliner article. It looks and reads well.

I was corrected by Russavia regarding the earliest regional jet. I added the section on the Yak-40 after researching its significance in the Russian airliner market. Now I see that part of your contributions have replaced this with the BAe 146. The Yak-40 has been in the market for 10+ years longer than the BAe 146. The number of units produced for each of the airliners (BAe 146 = 387 / Yak 40 = 1101) is something to consider as well.

I'm bringing this here because I'm not sure that you know. E_dog95'^{Talk' Contribs} 04:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite aware of the Yak's place in the market, but it was simply not in the same class of aircraft as the "true" RJ's. To be a true RJ you need to...

1) offer standalone support (airstairs, APU, etc)

2) offer short field performance

3) be quiet enough to operate from in-city airports

4) have fuel efficiency that makes the payload/radius/fuel ratios useful

Certainly the Yak meets the first two criterion, but by no means does it meet the second two. The Yak was famously noisy and even more famously poor on fuel. As the article here on the wiki notes, it's called the "kerosene destroyer for low fuel efficiency".

There is an important difference between "small airliner" and "feederliner", which was the original title of the article. However, as this term is not widely used, the article changed to regional as most feederliners fall into this category. Sadly the name "regional" simply implies "short range", which is why I don't like the term nearly as much. Maury 13:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK - thank you E_dog95'^{Talk' Contribs} 05:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of years ago you left a note on my talk page asking about Theorema Egregium. I'm back to working on wikipedia a bit and aiming to start by tying up some loose ends.

See User_talk:Loren_Rosen#About Theorema Egregium. In particular you wanted to understand what the article means when it says that the gaussian curvature doesn't depend on how the surface is embedded. Let me give a concrete example, which I hope I get right since it's been a while since I thought about this. Consider a sheet of notebook paper lying on a flat table. The paper is flat, curvature is 0. Now pick up the paper by two opposing sides, letting the middle sag. Looking at it from the outside, the paper now looks curved. But the gaussian curvature is still 0.

I assume you've read Flatland. How can flatlanders tell if their land is really flat? Maybe they actually live on a sphere? They could send out an expedition and if it actually comes back they know something. If it doesn't they'd never be quite sure. Instead, they can carefully measure the sum of the angles in large triangles. If they are indeed 180 degrees then their land is flat up to the accuracy of their measurements. In fact, I think Gauss discovered this curvature idea while working as a large scale surveyor (geodesy). In some respects the theorem is an extension of this idea about measuring triangles.

(And actually the flatlanders could also try determining the geometry of their universe by looking at light signals from existing far away objects, depending on the physics and origin of their universe. There has been some work on determining the geometry of our universe in this way.)

Loren Rosen 04:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]