User talk:David Kernow/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Calcium carbamide

You redirected this article to "calcium carbimide". This spelling is incorrect, which a check with Google will show you immediately. I have reverted the change. Denni ☯ 00:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. Please slap me with a buttered kipper. Regards, David Kernow 00:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

(link to Nicolaus Copernicus portrait inscriptions)

Hello David,
here are some artists' N.C. portrait inscriptions I found on internet [1].
Note: Piotrus put a nasty remark on the NC article history and changed it from your version again. Best regards MG 2/4/2006

Thanks, MG. I hadn't realised Copernicus was such a figure of contention before visiting his Wikipedia article! David Kernow 23:24, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

---

David, here are some comments, that give a pretty clear picture [2] add to that a number of others, Emax, PolishPolitician, Caius and on and on. The Copernicus article is only the tip of the iceberg. You might also check with Sca, who tried and tried. He noted that they won't let facts stand in their way at all. He pretty much gave up, as did many others. The supposed English-Language Wikipedia is in most of eastern European peoples and places articles really a Polish-partially English-Language version and almost unrecognisable. Anyway have a nice day MG 2/7/2006

Article assessment

Thanks for your addition to Wikipedia:Article assessment/Natural disasters - it's an interesting one! Not what I expected, though it certainly fits the criteria. I hope it does well and, with a quick glance over it, I reckon it will. violet/riga (t) 19:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

It was my first thought when I saw the topic – and although my next was that it wasn't a disaster for human beings, I decided to suggest it anyway. I suppose it's better described as a "cataclysmic event" or the like. Thanks for your message! David Kernow 22:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

The spammer

Thank you for reverting within seconds 70.19.66.105's two spam attacks on my talk page in the past few minutes. I just hope that (a) another hasn't been tried whilst I'm posting this; (b) no further attempts will be made; and (c) you're not finding yourself following this spammer around Wikipedia.

Best wishes, David Kernow 23:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I don't think we will have to worry about him for at least 24 hours (blocked). But yes, I had to persistantly follow him despite my many warning. :-( Well, someone had to follow him! :-D SWD316 ^{talk to me} 23:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Electroacoustic / Electroacoustic Music

The articles were merged. The rationale being that electroacoustic is not a noun.

Electroacoustics is a noun, as is jazz. They used to say "Jazz Music". I teach electroacoustics. My discipline is that of Electroacoustic Studies. My colleagues teach Jazz Studies.

Electroacoustic music is a sub-set of the larger discipline of electroacoustic studies.

There remains much confusion that electroacoustic music is a language. That is a debate for other places.

Electroacoustics is the larger discipline of acoustical energy being transduced into electrical energy (microphone), and electrical into acoustic (loudspeaker). This idea is not well thought of by many 'traditional' people, but there has been no (other) universal, coherent definition that has (almost) no exceptions.

Kevin Austin

Montreal, QC

2006 - II - 27

Thanks for these intriguing pointers, Kevin! David Kernow 09:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

External links vs External link (Swinside)

I can see nothing in the Manual of Style mandating the use of a plural form when there is only one link. Try reading Wikipedia:External_link#.22External_links.22_vs_.22External_link.22 for more information. Grinner 16:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I see Wikipedia:External_link#External links" vs "External link" also doesn't mandate the use of the singular, reporting that "There is currently no consensus on which is better". I hadn't realised this was the case, so thanks for alerting me to it. The link I botched my mention of in the edit summary was to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), specifically #Standard headings and ordering. In the case of Swinside, I've solved the problem by adding another link. Best wishes, David Kernow 17:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)