User talk:Zzorse
Welcome!
Hello, Zzorse, and
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
TheRingess 01:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, adding well sourced info to the fire hydrant article as your first logged in edit. Great start. :-) Kim Bruning 03:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Hog oiler
"Used by hogs"? Could you clarify that, please? thanks. bikeable (talk) 04:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- Good edits -- that's amazing, I've certainly never heard of it. I'd love to see a picture; the picture on the patent should not be copyright anymore, so if there's one in that that illustrates the point, maybe you can upload it (to [commons.wikimedia.org|commons] and link it on the page? Nice work. bikeable (talk) 04:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
US patent wikilink
Glad to help, Znorse! I learned that trick myself a week or so ago. --Uthbrian (talk) 20:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- To be honest, of the recent patent links you've been adding, I've yet to see one that is truely relevant. For example this one - bricks have been around for much longer than even the idea of patenting. The linked patent is just some small modification on the use of materials and really adds almost nothing to the article or anyone's understanding of bricks. In fact is worse than that, it creates the false impression that this patent is somehow important to the development of bricks.
- It would be worth adding a link like this when the linked patent is in fact the first publication on the subject of the article, but in all other cases we are better off without them. -- Solipsist 17:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't agree that we're better off without them. They at a minimum document ideas. Your caution that they could mislead some people may be true. That they hold the power to intrigue other people is also true.
Within these links are some true gems. The
Then there's the screw machine precursor, U.S. patent 79, which is mind blowing for the early date. Not to most, but to some of us.
The fire hydrant patents overturn a misconception online. (The page itself is in need of improvement, however)
Etc.
I WILL ponder your criticism. I've removed some patents, and will try to integrate some of the others in a way that may satisfy your concerns. Zzorse 21:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- And there I think is the problem - the link direction is the wrong way round. It is commonly the case that the relevance of a link is asymetric. If you were reading patent #97, you may well be interested to learn more about the history of bricks so a link to the Wikipedia article from there might be useful. However it is not the case that anyone reading about bricks would necessarily be interested in that patent. You are perhaps allowing your own interest in these early patents cloud your judgement as to their actual significance in the development of ideas.
- Again, you provide an excellent example of how misleading these patent links are. If you were surprised that there is a patent for a screw machine dated 1836, you have been misled. A simple web search could give you a link like this, which says the first screw cutting lathe was designed some forty years earlier in 1797 — and by and Englishman, not an American. So inserting a link to an old patent gives a wrong and POV impression of when and where screw machines might have been invented. Similarly the other patent links there seem equally as dubious; I doubt that any of them actually mark significant developments in screw machine design. If one did mark a genuine breaktrough in screw machine design, then a link to the patent would be appropriate, but it should also be significant enough to be discussed in the body of the article.
- Simply working through a list of early US patent and adding links to the Wikipedia article on the closest matching subject is going to do more harm than good. -- Solipsist 22:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
The asymmetry of interest you note is likely true for most, but not for others who revel in the minutiae. I can't recall a time when I've found traditional encyclopedias very interesting to read, at least on certain topics that appeal to me. Wikipedia is different.
I understand what you're saying about the potential of being misled, but a screw machine implies automation; the U.S. patent 79 I cited has a ratchet wheel that feeds headed screw blanks in succession to the screw cutting lathe as it cycles. Checking with Encyclopædia Britannica, 15th edition, their article "Tools" pegs the development of automatic screw cutting turret lathes at mid 19th century: they also reference the same screw cutting engine lathe you cite from 1797.
Your critique has been helpful to me. -- Zzorse 05:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
- In fact I've previously read a book that summarised notable inventions and included facsimiles of key pages and diagrams from their original patent applications and found it fascinating. But the asymmetry means that the links are better placed in an article such as List of notable patents, rather than scattered over a range of other articles where they are liable to mislead.
- In anycase, I will go ahead and remove the generic/random patents. If I remove one that is actually critical to the history of a subject, feal free to restore it. -- Solipsist 19:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
"RVV"
Hi. My edit was not vandalism. My first edit was a vandalism revert and the second one was a revert back to this edit (see expalanation). Thx. El_C 15:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. I intended to revert user Wackojut's edit, but my slow connection apparently tripped me up. You made two good edit's in between!!! I thought the Wiki software is supposed to prevent such conflicts. Zzorse 15:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. Yeah, the edit conflict function has been a bit wacky lately. Hopefuly, it'll be fixed soon. Regards, El_C 15:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Baduk
Salam! Thank you for your note. I will look into the article. Overall it is well-written and well-sourced. Nice work! I saw the film years ago when it was first released. I need to look for some sources in Persian. Siba 01:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Nicole Castrale
Glad to help out! Crunch 22:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Drunken Horses
The correct word is Horse not mule. The official Persian title in Iran uses Asb i.e. Horse, the Kurdish title also uses Hesp (horse).
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Baran-lateef.jpg
Thanks for uploading
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Strangers in Good Company dvd cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Re: Barefoot to Herat
Hi, I am back! I've never seen the movie either. It's a good start, but I'll keep an eye on it for expansion. Cheers. Siba (talk) 13:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I have changed the article's intro now. Not only was it misleading, but also I think it's disrespect to the audience both inside and outside of the country. Please edit it again if you think you can make the introduction to the article better. Thanks. Siba (talk) 05:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Baduk Jafar.jpg
Thanks for uploading
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Baduk dvd cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pedar dvd cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our
Unreferenced BLPs
- Nuno Mindelis - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Invitation to join WikiProject Bacon !
- Wikipedia:WikiProject_Bacon#Participants!
- You may also feel free to add the userbox - {{User Bacon}} - to your userpage, to indicate your participation in the WikiProject.
- The User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011.
Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Blast from the Past
Hey,
you reverted my supposed "unsubstantiated claim" for no reason. what I wrote was true at the time and i knew this first hand.
here is the page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pregabalin&oldid=54599508#Recreational_use
the "recreational use" section is what you removed and i believe it isnt right to arbitrarily decide what is real and valuable in this free encyclopedia without any claim. like i said, i know what i wrote from first hand experience and unless you were in switzerland during that time, i don't see how you could have ever came to the conclusion that i was wrong.
I dont want it to be changed back or anything. i just want you to know that it wasnt fair and to me or my friends. it seems like you have a thing against us.
We eagerly await some explanation
kind regards
friend —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.38.167.202 (talk) 12:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Non-free rationale for File:Mehrollah.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 18:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Low-noise block downconverter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acrylic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Fire hydrant flag
In Ludington where I live in Michigan they have to have flags to mark where the hydrant is, because many times the snow covers the fire-hydrant. Do they have anything like that where you live?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, these help firefighters locate hydrants in an emergency. Zzorse (talk) 16:11, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
- O.K. Do you have this much snow in your town (i.e. 4 feet)?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 16:13, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Zzorse. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Zzorse. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Zzorse. Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the
The
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review