User talk:HMman/Archive 1

Archive 1

October 2011

Please don't change the format of dates. As a general rule, if an article has evolved using predominantly one format, the dates should be left in the format they were originally written in, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic. Please also note that Wikipedia does not use ordinal suffixes (e.g., st, nd, th), articles, or leading zeros on dates.

For more information about how dates should be written on Wikipedia, please see this article.

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on Wikipedia. Thank you. Fleet Command (talk) 06:27, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing that to my attention; I had been over much of the Wikipedia Manual of Style, but due to my relative newness I had not come across that section yet. I had not realized the source for the release info was in the download link, changing that was simply a dumb mistake on my part. If I make any other Wikipedia format mistakes like that please let me know. HMman (talk) 21:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. And thank you for your understanding and politeness. You needn't worry; that's how we learn and everything is alright. :) Cheers. Fleet Command (talk) 06:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Busy beaver

I've reverted your addition of the no footnotes box at the top of busy beaver. Most sections in that article are, in fact, cited. They are not links (they merely state the citation in text). But if that is your concern, I'm sure you can easily link them in some way (I don't particularly know what the best way is). If you still think it needs better citation, please start a section in the talk page so that we can understand the best way to address this. Thanks, — sligocki (talk) 23:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I see what you mean, thank you for taking the time to explain the revision to me beyond what was said in the edit summary box. I am not disputing your change, but wouldn't the wording of the "no footnotes" box imply it would also be applicable for situations such as on that page? HMman (talk) 00:19, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

You're probably right, the "no footnotes" box is probably meant to suggest that articles have more footnotes. But it's not clear to me that that's a big shortcoming of the busy beaver article. Like I said, if you think the article could use more footnotes instead of text citations, I think it would make sense to add them rather than simply adding a note on the top. Cheers, — sligocki (talk) 00:29, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Alright, thank you for your time. HMman (talk) 00:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, HMman. You have new messages at Halsteadk's talk page.
Message added 17:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Halsteadk (talk) 17:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Innocent Life

The template automatically puts North American releases before Australian releases. The game was released in Australia before North America. By putting two separate templates, the release dates are in order. ~ Hibana (talk) 15:09, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thank you, I wasn't aware of that. Regards, HMman (talk) 03:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC).

highly significant correlation between bone strength and muscle strength

In the osteoporosis article, in the risk factors, you removed: "* Weakness— a highly significant correlation between bone strength and muscle strength has been shown" (with citation PMID 8805035)

This is a precise statement, and the obvious conclusion is: If you do training which increases muscle strength (muscle building training), you can also prevent osteoporosis.

The often used term "weight bearing exercise" for prevention of osteoporosis is less precise, even "walking" is regarded as "weight bearing exercise".

So I recommend that the term "highly significant correlation between bone strength and muscle strength" is (again) explicitly mentioned in the osteoporosis article, to show that muscle building training is efficient for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wqq (talk • contribs) 20:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I have reworded the section per your suggestion. Regards, HMman (talk) 20:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC).

Got your messages

Thanks, I'll make notes now and reduce the number of changes. Glad you like the improvements to the article. FYI, any user is free to delete anything from their talk page whenever they wish. 842U (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. I realize users may delete messages from their talk page whenever they like, but when a recipient deletes messages without explanation, it gives the impression that the recipient so disagreed with the message (or was so stuck-up) that they weren't even going to do the sender the courtesy of responding. Hence my frustration. Regards, HMman (talk) 16:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

If this is really about courtesy, you might refrain from calling another editor names. Thanks. 842U (talk) 16:23, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Critical_analysis_of_evolution

Hello HMman,

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a deletion discussion about the redirect Critical_analysis_of_evolution . If you're interested in participating in this discussion, please leave your comments here Thanks, ~~Ebe123~~ → report 02:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Romaji

Hi, FYI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Katakana#Romaji — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.214.75 (talk) 02:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, although I am a little confused as to why you feel I'd be able to help with this. I've just started learning Japanese, so I'm afraid I'm not yet qualified to comment on the romaji issue. Regards, HMman (talk) 03:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC).

Hugh Cairns

Hi. The image is for a VC and bar. I know I am being pedantic but he only received the VC (only 3 people received a second award) - so removing the image, not just from his page but from a bunch of others. Hope that makes sense. Gbawden (talk) 14:18, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I see, thank you for the explanation. I'll revert my revert. Regards, HMman (talk) 14:57, 10 December 2012 (UTC).

Pitaya edit

Wasn't questioning the definition, HMman, but rather the sentence structure. Your edit is fine. Thanks for checking. --Zefr (talk) 15:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree the sentence structure isn't as nice now, but the reverted revision gave the impression pseudohematuria referred to the coloration of the feces as well, when it does not. Perhaps a bit pedantic on my part, but I would rather have accuracy than good sentence structure. Thanks for the reply. Regards, HMman (talk) 16:29, 31 December 2012 (UTC).

Re: Calling All Dawns cover

Weird! I guess this was some kind of performance issue, I've seen that once in a while (when both images have the same pixel size, I guess the background process that creates all thumbnails is slower). I see the better version too, now. -- Luk ^talk 10:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear it wasn't something I was doing wrong; I don't have much experience with picture uploading. To clarify, when you say you see the better version too, do you mean for the current version or for the "17:00, January 1, 2013" version? I still see the fuzzier version as the current version; I just want to make sure it's not something on my end. HMman (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC).

Lose of the west: Grammar; I'm assuming "loss" was meant instead of "lose"

Thanks for that.
—Sowlos 14:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome, I'm glad to have helped in a small way. HMman (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC).

Historical Aliyah Data Book by Moshe Sicron (1957)

Hello HMman,

In regards to this book, I have a question--does it have aliyah data for each country (rather than only for each continent) for each of the periods between 1919 and 1948 (or before 1919)? Table 3 on this website provides detailed aliyah info for some countries between 1919 and 1948 (http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Population_and_Migration/Migration_since_World_War_I). It says that it got this data from the 1957 book by Moshe Sicron, so this book should contain data for each country separately. I would like aliyah data for each country separately and for each continent for each time period between 1919 and 1948, as well as any aliyah data (either cumulative, by continent, or by country) for any time periods between 1882 and 1918 (I think you previously said 1882-1903 and 1904-1918 or something like that). I want to use this info to further expand this table here on Wikipedia -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah#Statistics . If you're able to get me at least some of this data/info, then I'll think about whether I need any other info or data from this book. I'm not particularly interested in separate aliyah data for legal and illegal immigration, at least not yet. Also, I apologize for asking, but what state or region do you live in? You can refuse to answer if you want, but I am curious because your library has an aliyah statistics book from Israel which is over half a century old in both English and Hebrew, which would probably be very rare for libraries in the United States. You don't live in Israel, do you? Also, thank you very much for all of your help. For the record, you can either give me the data and I will edit this historical aliyah data on Wikipedia or you can edit this historical aliyah table on Wikipedia yourself if you want to. Futurist110 (talk) 20:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be best if I give you the data rather than directly entering it, as I know so little about this topic I don't trust myself to edit on it. :) Unfortunately, the book does not give breakdowns by country; that information seems to be in the statistical supplement, which I don't have access to. As most of the data you are asking for is in a tabular format, I'll reproduce it in a table from which you can copy and paste whatever you need:

	total number of registered immigrants	total number of unregistered immigrants	% of registered immigrants from Europe	% of registered immigrants from America	% of registered immigrants from Asia	% of registered immigrants from Africa
1919-1923 (Third Aliyah)	35,183	-	93.0	2.3	3.9	0.8
1924-1931 (Fourth Aliyah)	81,613	-	84.8	2.8	11.6	0.8
1932-1938 (Fifth Aliyah)	197,235	19,293	88.6	2.4	8.4	0.6
1939-1945 (World War II)	81,808	9,702	81.5	0.1	17.0	1.4
1946-1948 (Post World War II)	56,467	4,556	95.6	0.3	2.3	1.8

The estimated number of immigrants for 1882-1903 (First Aliyah) and 1904-1914 (Second Aliyah), respectively, are 20,000-30,000 and 35,000-40,000.

All this data is from Chapter II: Jewish Immigration to Palestine During the Mandatory Period, 1919-1948. The book's bibliographic info is as follows: Sicron, Moshe (1957). Immigration to Israel: 1948-1953. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Post Press.

I am from neither Israel nor the States; I am from Saskatchewan, Canada, and the book is from the University of Saskatchewan library. As to why there is an obscure book of Israeli aliyah data there, I really couldn't tell you. I hope this is enough information for you to work with; if you need any more information just give me a shout, I'll be holding onto this book for the next couple of weeks. Regards, HMman (talk) 23:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC).

Sorry for the late reply. In regards to this info, unfortunately a lot of it is already available from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics. Are you sure that you do not have access to the supplement with the country data? Futurist110 (talk) 08:08, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I am sure the library does not have the statistical supplement; otherwise, I would have used its data instead. Sorry this isn't the data you needed, but it is all that is available in the book. HMman (talk) 14:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC).

Sorry for the very late response, but I have one more question--does your library have the statistical supplement in Hebrew? Futurist110 (talk) 04:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

No; if it did I certainly would have mentioned it, but all the library has is the book itself. I wish the library had the statistical supplement; now I feel a bit bad for getting your hopes up like that. :) HMman (talk) 14:53, 31 March 2013 (UTC).

Award!

	Research assistant of the hour award
	Thanks for your help on My Old Man's a Dustman. Formerip (talk) 19:42, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome, I'm glad I could help! HMman (talk) 19:52, 25 April 2013 (UTC).

Euphemism treadmill

Thanks for the !note about the euphamism treadmill redirect on the euphamism page. I write because I am uncertain whether "euphamism treadmill" is sufficiently notable to deserve mention at all, and would be grateful for your view? I am of two minds. On the one hand, the Baltimore Sun as footnoted did (once) cite the so called euphamism treadmill. So by that measure it barely qualifies as notable. On the other hand--I personally never heard of a euphamism treadmill. I do not think it is a term taught in classes on language or grammar or linguistics. It looks and sounds like jargon invented and self-promoted by a pop psychologist to get his name in lights. Originally that part of the page advertised the guy's two books (which advertisement I deleted). What do you think? ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 14:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I was previously familiar with the phrase "euphemism treadmill", but, after giving the edit history of "euphemism" a brief look-over, I would suspect you would be more familiar with the notability of the phrase than I. The extent of my involvement in the article was only to put the hidden note as I had noticed the euphemism treadmill redirect was broken; I have not done any sort of research on the topic (until adding the note I hadn't been aware that it was Steven Pinker that coined the phrase). I would suggest bringing up your question on the talk page; while I certainly appreciate your question, I do not know enough about the issue to have an informed opinion. HMman (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC).

Thanks. If you were previously familiar with it, than that is good enough for me. While Wikipedia is not for coining new words, if a particular bit of jargon has already gotten into circulation as this one apparently has, then it is a question of the weight to give it. I'd asked here because if the decision was to delete it from "euphamism" then your redirect would properly go to the Wikipage of Mr. Pinker as the phrase's author. I did not want to redirect your redirect without the courtesy of a discussion. ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 13:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)