User talk:NatusRoma

NatusRoma is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia in a while.

/Archive 1: March 2005-March 2006

Please reconsider your request for deletion:

Amazon.com rankings do not appear to be adequate grounds for deletion. These rankings fluctuate many times per day based on most recent sale of item. Scott Sigler has an uncontested listing and his flagship publication Earthcore was in the hundreds of thousands yesterday. Rob Callahan's book Damaged Goods was listed at approximately 64-thousand yesterday.

The author is not solely self-published. The author's bibliography contains one self-published work and six works published by others.

If this page is about Chris or the perspective member of Congress, than make it about Chris and not play guilt of association games with unproven allegations from Ronnie Earle, who is making a movie. If you include the Delay Indictment , than both sides of the Delay indictment must be presented. There is nothing untruthfull about what I have posted. In my view, since nothing in the Delay allegations is proven, there is no point in indicting everyone by association that his PAC game money to until it is proven.Bachs 01:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC) moved here from my User page NatusRoma 02:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot include one side of an unproven allegation and not include the other side. If you insist on playing "guilt by association" to members of congress based un unproven allegations by Ronnie Earle who is making a movie and who has engaged in politically motivated indictments before than both sides of the indictment story must be explained in order to have balance. Also - if the members are going to be critiqued for not returning the money the reason for not returning the money should be listed. Again - you cannot whitewash one side of the indictment story and than use it to play the "guilt by association game" on the members bios, its unfair.

The only ethical choices are to have both sides of the delay indictment story or no reference to it at all. Bachs 02:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Natus Roma said - "A lengthy description of the other side of the story has no place in those articles." - So only one side of the story that implies guilt by association is proper huh .....

But the fact that you make the association in the first place does the damage and you well know it, and after all we are talking about a highly suspect unproven allegation here Bachs 03:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok lets try this -

This way Democrats say XXX and Republicans say XXX and both sides facts are presented so the reader can than chose what to believe. I think thats fair.

wait a sec I pasted the wring thing ... Bachs 03:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok here for a compromise - this way Dems say XXX and Reps say XXX and both sides get their facts out.

Among all members of Congress, Chocola received the sixth largest amount of money from former

I think that my changes already have the "Dems say X, Repubs say X" quality. DeLay is indicted, Democrats call on Chocola to return the money, DeLay denies the charges as politically motivated, DeLay has not been found guilty, Chocola has not been accused of wrongdoing.

For starters, can we agree to drop the mention of the movie? It's a minor detail not widely reported except by Byron York, who seems to have a minor obsession with it. NatusRoma 03:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do we do about Bachs? He insists on slamming Ronnie Earle and his investigation of Tom Delay on nearly any US House member's article that has a connection to Delay, and has violated the 3RR at least twice. I'm not sure where to go from here, if admins should be contacted or whatnot, I haven't had to deal with this kind of situation before. Thanks. --JMurphy 19:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Today, he/she removed many of NatusRoma's edits on various articles and marked them all "(RV NatusRoma's vandalism)". He has done the same to me on 2003 Texas redistricting after I removed his original research. I agree that admin intervention is necessary. He's engaging in edit wars and falsely characterizing edits as vandalism.David Hoag 17:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it's you taht put some {{wikify}} on the dacian sound changes please be more specific The Page is align in my opinion as it needed to be —Preceding unsigned comment added by MariusA (talk • contribs) 13:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like HTML however. NatusRoma (I assume) is suggesting a format more in line with Wikipedia's format. Alexander 007 00:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. But I'm not aware of the needed changes. Could somebody to format well taht page--MariusA 02:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought Alexa ratings under 80,000 were acceptable for Wiki. What is the actual acceptable number? #--Dark Tichondrias 20:45, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just delete it. I didn't remember correctly he said under 10,000 instead of 80,000. I will be more careful next time I make a page. Dark Tichondrias 20:54, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here was my rationale for removing the implication, per Wikipedia:No personal attacks#Examples:

"Specific examples of personal attacks include but are not limited to: ... Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme."

Let me know what you think. --Christopherlin 23:20, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will not update the Wiles page for about four months. I have been working on it hard as a long-term project. See user:Timothy Clemans/wiles

I have been reading books at the UW Mathematics Research Library. Timothy Clemans 03:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does my work so far, have any promise at all? Timothy Clemans 21:29, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE Here is what I have for the introduction so far:

Sir Andrew John Wiles (April 11, 1953) is a British-American mathematician. He is one of the world's foremost authorities on

Cambridge University in 1980. He was a Junior Research Fellow at Clare College and a Benjamin Pierce Assistant Professor at Harvard University from 1977 to 1980. He was a visiting professor at the Sonderforschungsbereich Theoretische Mathematik in Bonn in 1981. He was a member of the Institute for Advanced Study in the fall of 1981. He became professor of mathematics at Princeton University in 1982. He was a visiting professor at the University of Paris, Orsay in the spring of 1982. Supported by a Guggenheim Fellowship, he was from 1985 - 1986 a visiting professor at the Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientifiques and at the Ecole Normale Superieure. He was a Royal Society

Research Professor at Oxford University from 1988 to 1990. He was appointed Eugene Higgins Professor of Mathematics at Princeton University in 1994.

Today I am doing more work on his awards, and publications. I will also be looking at his work on Iwasawa theory. Timothy Clemans 17:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That statement comes from a news article called Fame by Numbers regarding Wiles' repution after working on Iwasawa theory. Timothy Clemans 21:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the Andrew Wiles page. Could you please review it and write a note about it on my talk page? Timothy Clemans 18:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the Andrew Wiles page. Could you please let me know if you can still suggest improvements? Timothy Clemans 02:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too sure about the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture being in the article in the past.Timothy Clemans 02:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might try checking the history before you say no changes were made. Jordanmills 02:39, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't recall where I got that fact about the number of bills Delay whipped. It was either from "the Hammer" or the American Prospect, but I think the former, since I couldn't find the stat on TAP. I also added the bit about the unprecedented party discipline of the contemporary House, but no citation should be needed there, since the increase in party discipline is common knowledge.Dinopup 03:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering what the guidelines regarding Alexa ratings are. I had not heard of such a rule and I could find no reference to Alexa ratings on the rules page.Alethiareg 22:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that makes sense.Alethiareg 13:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity, what was the purpose of your changes to the redirect I added? Is there a MoS entry on redirects? -- Mwanner | Talk 19:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I knew there had to be something. I checked the link, but I didn't actually try a lookup on the article. -- Mwanner | Talk 23:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Thanks for fixing the category and some links in the group theory pages.

Hopefully these new pages will be of use to people learning group theory

Vipul 11:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review and modify the Illinois article. Any additional comments are appreciated. --Dual Freq 23:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any further comments on the Illinois article? I would like to re-submit for GA, but I'd like to make sure all of your problems with it have been addressed. The intro has been revised, so I'd like your opinion on that. --Dual Freq 01:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your help and comments. --Dual Freq 02:17, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have listed my content on copyright violations at wikipedia for the Darren Thurston article - -but I am the originator of the material (from freedarren.org[6])! And I would like it reposted. I can't figure out how to navigate wikipedia and have this pull of material corrected - can you please help me? redcedar

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sam Spade. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sam Spade/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sam Spade/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 00:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you were the first registered user to edit the article on Spoon River Anthology. My English teacher read the article to our class today. I think it's a pretty good article. Robot569 18:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to

Thanks for the hard work in answering my various objections. I've withdrawn most of them, including the lead and general length ones as I have no idea what to cut. I've voted Support, and left one last little quote that could use a reference. Thanks! Staxringold _talk^contribs 23:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• The only idea I have is maybe convert that data to a table on the side and just leave the sentence as "DeLay became involved, by contacting several federal agencies in order to determine the location of the missing legislators." with the several agencies to the side. Then just either expand that section a bit to justify it standing alone as a subsection, or merge into a related area. Staxringold _talk^contribs 15:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thx for your message. See dash. Tony 03:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

plain truth of it is, Bachs is really annoying, and I thought commiserating with someone who's tried to deal with him would make us both feel better. --JMurphy 06:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've put this article up for deletion. As someone who has worked with this article before, you may wish to weigh in.--Rosicrucian 14:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the reference for the text below is the German version of Wikipedia. I have simply translated those lines from the German version. Unfortunately, Wikipedia has once more thrown me out an so it does not appear in the history of the article who has put these lines in the Pilet-Golaz article, sorry for that, I very often forget to verify, whether I am still in Wikipedia or whether I have been thrown out. Sinenomine1 15:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pilet-Golaz was said to be a pragmatic politician who tried to do with the German and Italian fascism. He therefore had to face the reproach that he sympathized with the fascism.[citation needed]

As the head of the foreign affairs, he had to find a balance between the German requirements, the objections of the Allies and the will of Switzerland to stay independent. The way he choose, namely to build a relatively good rapport with the Third Reich, was very disputed, during as well as after the war.[citation needed]

When in 1944 he tried to take up relations with the Soviet Union, the latter refused roughly. So Pilet-Golaz lost all support and had to resign.

[7] I replied to your request for help at the Village Pump. I hope you find it useful and it solves both problems, definately will solve one of them. MECU≈talk 20:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There actually IS something wrong with have a redirect to redlink; those are speedily deletable under

I'd like to point out that there was actually no consensus to merge to the non-existant list; some people wanted them "merged" back to the individual seasons.

mergeto}} tag if you want. Mangojuice^talk 19:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

• thanks for your zeal to clear up copyright violation in wiki but you just made a 'small' mistake this time, the picture of thakran was infact clicked by one of my friends who works in the bureau and i had uploaded it after asking for his permission so it will be appreciated if you can remove the tag of copyright violation over the pic of thakran. By the way on a happier note
  Durga puja, as for cometic changes to RAW why not you also pitch in, and i mention once again wiki articles should be interesting. on a similar note i have asked Columnist Gp Capt SM HALI from the defencejournal if i could use his thesis a the backbone of the article on raw in wiki so i think the copyright matter can be stopped there. Legaleagle86 08:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Thank you for editing the report on Kao, it was really a good edit, why not try the same type of edit on RAW ie., to respect copyright but also make the article more appealing and interesting Legaleagle86 10:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you first for the zeal to clear copyrighted material. I mwould like to know for further ref on the prohibition of use of govt. info. Please do feel free to change the page if you think its violative of wiki's fundamentals but i would request that in the zeal to clear up the article one must also try to see that the article is asthetic enough, after your last purge the photo of the Late DP Kohli seems to overlapping with the names of director, with much respect to you and the great man Late Kohli i must say that it is unbecoming of anyone to edit the page in such shoddy manner, i leave it upon you to edit the article properly so that this injustice is removed. Legaleagle86 03:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...for reverting vandalism on my userpage! McMillin24 _contribs^talk 11:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you revered truthful information I posted in this article because you didn't feel it was encyclopedic. Please explain the basis for your deletion. Independent public markets are scientifically proven to be at least as accurate, if not more accurate than many polls and pundits. Furthermore, this sourse actually quantifies the amount of the political impact.