User talk:Hertz1888/Archive 8

Charles R. Apted

For our next project (after the current dust has well settled) I'd like to get back to Mr. Apted. I mentioned earlier how much fun would be "DYK ... that Harvard Cop #1 Charles R. Apted identified the dynamite-wielding intruder who shot J. P. Morgan, Jr. as wife-poisoner, US Senate bomber, and deranged former Harvard German instructor Eric Muenter?" I didn't occur to me to nominate for DYK when I created it, but remember new GAs are eligible too. The nice thing is there's no stupid 5-day clock for GAs. So here's what I was thinking... can you do a look-around for sources not already listed at Talk:Charles R. Apted? There may very well be little more but you're likely to try some search strategies I didn't. But please don't actually do anything to the article since then you won't be allowed to do the GA review. Wink, wink. Again, no hurry. Let's make this a project for the next 3 months. EEng (talk) 05:39, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps that wasn't a sufficiently ambitious proposal

Here's a second project we can simmer over a longer period: Widener will be 100 years old next year. How about if we make the that article an FA by then, to appear as TFA on the anniversary date? Wouldn't that be fun? EEng (talk) 06:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure, but isn't it already of that caliber, or nearly? If so, most of the fun has already been had. As it presently stands, the article is richly and elaborately detailed, with few, if any, visible loose ends. Hertz1888 (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Christ, when did this happen?

[1] I poked around., It's like when Boston Edison changed its name to Nstar -- old wine, new bottles, but a desperate desire to remake itself, without apparently understanding why, beyond a certainty of the urgent necessity of doing so. This "The Harvard Library" has innovative this and seamless than and even affinity groups and marketing experts and brand managers, for chrissakes. It's all downhill from here. We're doomed. [2] EEng (talk) 17:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

As long as it doesn't scuttle the DYK effort. Universities used to have departments. Now they have cost centers. And ever-proliferating, jargon-laden management. "Progress might have been alright all right once, but it has gone on too long." — Ogden Nash. Hertz1888 (talk) 17:38, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

You're not seriously suggesting that Nash wrote the "word" alright, are you? Perhaps you could go look it up at the cost center. EEng (talk) 19:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Gasp. It's common that way on the 'net, but "all right" is more common. All right, I surrender. Hertz1888 (talk) 19:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

In loco

I found this [3] very interesting -- article by Eliot regarding fire risk (apparently there'd been a conflagration at Wellesley) -- interesting in part because of the glimpses of the minutiae of college life 1850 on. Kids today with their fire escapes and automatic sprinklers and portable fire extinguishers don't realize how pampered they are -- in Eliot's day it was a big advance, apparently, that "ropes long enough to reach the ground were placed in all chambers of the dormitories." See also on that same page re building the steam tunnels (ever been in them? -- I have!). EEng (talk) 05:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Complaining you my sentences in which lost you get about were

Try this one, from [4]. Take it slow or you may get dizzy:

His enthusiasm as a collector and his winning personality as a man who him so many friends in the world of book dealers and book collectors that he was afforded many opportunities of obtaining treasures whose acquisition cannot be explained alone on the basis of the wealth which he commanded.

It needs only a small fix but even after intuiting what that was my brain kept getting derailed in rehearsing the corrected sentence in my mind. EEng (talk) 21:03, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Small fix? I dunno. Sure is cumbersome, any way you slice it.

His enthusiasm as a collector and his winning personality as a man who him had so many friends in the world of book dealers and book collectors that he was afforded him many opportunities of obtaining treasures whose acquisition cannot be explained alone on the basis of the wealth which he commanded.

Hertz1888 (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

What... did you graduate before Expos? Try:

His enthusiasm as a collector and his winning personality as a man whowon him so many friends in the world of book dealers and book collectors that he was afforded many opportunities of obtaining treasures whose acquisition cannot be explained alone on the basis of the wealth which he commanded.

EEng (talk) 22:27, 11 June 2014 (UTC) P.S. I got a D- in Expos. That's really true. Imagine me taking Writing for Science from some frustrated Hemingway calling himself Dr. Somebody. How clueless do you have to be to affect "Doctor" when teaching undergrads at H? What a joke. (It is a sentence of EEng-worthy complexity, I agree. But without the beautifully complex punctuation. Or the fragments.)

CCAE

Hi! About this revert - it's not a mistake. Cambridge Center for Adult Education has the acronym CCAE. In addition a charter school does too, so I disambiguate by linking the charter school WhisperToMe (talk) 04:57, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for explaining. It never hurts to use the edit summaries. Hertz1888 (talk) 05:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Where have you been?

You've been missing out. I've been amusing (User:EEng#If_only_every_day_included_something_like_this) and abusing (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Abuse_by_User:EEng) people while you've been asleep at the switch. And Widener now has 125 sources -- that's, um, 1/300 of 1% of the sources in Widener! EEng (talk) 04:45, 29 June 2014 (UTC) P.S. You also missed the accusation that I'm an antisemitic Presbyterian. Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Lili_Bosse (skip down to the fish image).

Self-revert wasn't necessary at Israeli settlement

See the ARBPIA header on the talk page - "Reverts of edits made by anonymous IP editors that are not vandalism are exempt from 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring." Sean.hoyland - talk 16:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Right you are. Thanks for reminding me, and for your additional point (in edit summary) about failure to distinguish. Hertz1888 (talk) 16:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Levite

Hello, Hertz -- I was just reading the article on Levites a few minutes ago, and I noticed that "Pidyon Haben" is spelled at least three different ways in the article (different capitalization). Is there a reason for that, or should it be made consistent? CorinneSD (talk) 20:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

No reason I can see, other than inadvertance or lack of standardization. It's spelled at least two different ways even in its own article at pidyon haben. I think making it consistent would be a very good idea. Hertz1888 (talk) 22:40, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Would you like to suggest a particular spelling and capitalization form? CorinneSD (talk) 23:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I would be inclined to use Pidyon HaBen because, of the common forms, it is least likely to be mispronounced by readers unfamiliar with Hebrew. Of course, that clarity requires the capitalization as shown. This form already has a redirect to the linked article. Cheers, Hertz1888 (talk) 07:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I fixed the spelling/capitalization. I also unlinked two instances of it since it was already linked earlier in the article. Now I see another edit to the article. I am unable to judge the edit (or the cryptic edit summary), but I noticed that the beginning of that very sentence (not changed by that editor), is missing something -- book? article? Do you want to look at both the edit and the problem with the sentence? CorinneSD (talk) 00:13, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Israeli salad

your right of course; 300+ years vs 60+ years, who would get the seniority eh?

Look, I don't know what you people are taught, but the origin of food & signature dishes is not a small matter. This entry is _completely_ in error, for the reasons I've listed below.

If you're unaware of the history of culinary development or modern legal cultural heritage designations, you should refrain from creating or editing country-of-origin pages. Your ignorant and you do far more damage to knowledge than your hasty knowledge would presume.

---

Here is my response to the original person who reverted the edit:

As to the substance of your argument, this particular salad cannot possibly be thousands of years old, since it is based on tomatoes which originated in America, and were unknown in Eurasian cuisines until well after the time of Columbus. All cuisines are interrelated and borrow from one another. The article already acknowledges the connections between Israeli and Arab versions. Greeks, Turks, Persians and Indians all have similar dishes. None are ancient, since all are based on tomatoes. Chopping raw tomatoes and cucumbers together is common and self evident to cooks worldwide, and while wonderful, is not exactly haute cuisine. Wikipedia is not the place to settle culinary scores or right great culinary wrongs. We can and should have several articles about similar dishes within the context of various ethnic cuisines. Please do not continue your argumentative style. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:44, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Our article Tomato makes it clear that tomatoes were not cultivated in the Middle East until the mid-19th century. Coincidentally, though Jews have lived in what is now Israel since ancient times, significant Jewish resettlement of that area began in the mid-19th century. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:58, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

---

First I said the CULTURES are thousands of years old. Second tomatoes were introduced into Ottoman empire in the **seventeenth century**. So you're comparing a recent state STEALING a dish and claiming as its own, to several hundred years of cultural heritage of the region; this would be akin to the Americans claiming that Parmigiano Reggiano is in AMERICAN cheese. Third, your personal opinion on the simplicity of the dish is no more valid than stating that herbs de provencal is just a mixture - ** it is a signature mixture in the region **. Fourth, YEAH IT IS; your articles are supposed to be accurate - absent any change in the dish, its insulting to have attempts at clearly stating the dishes origin deleted. This country is less than 60 years old, the dish is identical - why not redirect to the Arab or Turkish equivalent? THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE, and further, there is _clearly_ a history of complaints regarding this abusive entry. If this is the level of expertise you contribute in your editing, its no wonder the articles on wikipedia suck so badly. NEVER give up substance for neutrality. Either mark it up properly, delete the article, or redirect it to the proper authentic version that the israeli version copies. This garbage about an Israeli version is _complete_ hokum. Next you'll tell me a BLT in Isreal is an Israeli BLT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.176.137 (talk) 05:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

This discussion does not belong here and is not wanted here. It's not my fight. My only point is that editorializing (unsourced commentary)—regardless of merit—is not allowed in Wikipedia articles. I agree with User:Cullen328 that your argumentative style is inappropriate. Hertz1888 (talk) 07:00, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Look, I don't want to interfere, and perhaps I'm showing my ignorance, but I hear a lot nowadays about the conflict between Israel and Hummus -- is that related to this somehow? EEng (talk) 01:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I suppose even that very serious situation can benefit from a touch of levity. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:42, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Look, after Dr. Strangelove all bets were off. EEng (talk) 04:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

As always...

good to know you're lurking in the shadows. I had intentionally omitted the Camb Hist Comm translation because from my limited (very, very limited) Latin I was suspicious. In my fantasy (no kidding) you'd then reveal yourself to be my LoHo roommate, the Rhodes scholar and double-concentrator in Classics and Govt. Either that hope is now dashed or you're playing it amazingly cool. EEng (talk) 00:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Not him. Sorry to dash your hope, though I could still be cool. You'll notice I left it open for you to find a better translation. I don't know enough Latin to be suspicious. Maybe it all depends on whose hall is being gored. Cheers, Hertz1888 (talk) 00:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Or maybe you're just saying you're not him. BTW, have you visited the Museum_of_Unintentionally_Hilarious_Edit_Outcome? EEng (talk) 01:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm really not, probably not even of the same generation. Viewing the Museum, I'm sure no one would want to be nostalgic for the days of those implements. What a diabolical collection. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:38, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I always thought it sounded like bullshit

[5] EEng (talk) 08:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

It's simply amazing the information you are privy to.[6] P.S. If you must pun, pun gently, not pungently. Hertz1888 (talk) 09:41, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Right now I'm too pooped to come up with a response worthy of those. EEng (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Been to the museum lately?

User:EEng#Museum_of_tasteless_proposals_for_ice-cream_flavors EEng (talk) 22:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Sick humor, but hilarious. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:45, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Who woulda thunk?

[7] EEng (talk) 03:38, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Who, indeed. If it isn't El­ea­nore. Very subtle. Hertz1888 (talk) 08:11, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Cherub

Hello, Hertz1888! About two days ago I went through the article on Cherub carefully. I found some issues and thought I'd ask you about them. I left a comment on my talk page at User talk:CorinneSD#Cherub and pinged you, but I guess you didn't see it. Now, today, several editors have made further edits, but I think most of the issues I raised in my comment were not affected. Some of the issues are minor, but since it was not my field I thought I'd ask you to be sure before making the changes. If you have time, could you read my comment and address the issues? Then, of course, you can also look at the latest edits to the article. CorinneSD (talk) 23:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I just looked at the article again and see some vandalism. An editor has been blanking sections. CorinneSD (talk) 23:08, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not knowledgeable on the subject and would have to get up to speed. I do not presently have the time to do so and take a concentrated look, but will try to get to it soon. Meanwhile, I do note that the article is back to the state in which you left it a few days ago. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

O.K. CorinneSD (talk) 14:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Solar constant

Hello, Hertz1888! Today I viewed the page Solar constant and was surprised to see that the symbol for the decimal marker was a point and the thousands separator was a comma throughout the page. The SI general rule for thousands separators is to avoid commas or points and to use spaces instead. Since I'm new to editing Wikipedia pages I thought I would add some neutrality to the numbers by changes the thousands separators to spaces and changing kW where possible to W (example 1.340 kW to 1 340 W).

I should have known this is not the appropriate way of altering Wikipedia pages. Therefore I want to ask you two questions: 1) What is the general rule for displaying decimal marker and thousands separator on Wikipedia pages? 2) Is it possible for you, or anyone else, to alter the shown numbers on the Solar constant page to a more SI conformed style?

My interest is not just in the Solar constant page but for all Wikipedia to be as scientific as possible; at least in the display of numbers etc. As you can see I don't have an account for this is just something that caught my attention. I'm sure that I've missed information about how to properly write or edit Wikipedia pages but I'm happy to hear about tips & tricks or any other explanation. 46.227.236.78 (talk) 10:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The relevant bits follow:

• The 10th resolution of CGPM in 2003 declared that "the symbol for the decimal marker shall be either the point on the line or the comma on the line." In practice, the decimal point is used in English-speaking countries and most of Asia, and the comma in most of Latin America and in continental European languages.[54]
• Spaces should be used as a thousands separator (1000000) in contrast to commas or periods (1,000,000 or 1.000.000) to reduce confusion resulting from the variation between these forms in different countries.

I can see how this makes sense. A better place to discuss it is probably Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). - Denimadept (talk) 16:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, "46", for asking, and thank you, Denim, for your always helpful comments. I will put a beginner's guide to the basic WP policies on your talk page, 46. In simplest terms, anyone may edit WP, and anyone may revert the edit. There are certain protocols you can read about in the guide. Using the edit summary space leaves a record of what was changed, tells other editors something about your intentions, and helps distinguish legitimate edits from vandalism. Editors are expected to be collaborative. A useful practice (not a requirement) is to discuss major and controversial changes on the article's talk page, especially after being reverted; see WP:BRD. An extensive Manual of Style governs matters of style. A propos the current matter, under MOS:DECIMAL the MOS policy is that in scientific articles it is an acceptable option to separate groups of digits to the left of the decimal point by spaces rather than commas – but it must be done consistently throughout the article. The use of spaces rather than commas is not wrong, but (in my view) will be unfamiliar to many readers and impede their reading. As far as I can see, WP does not make conformity to SI practices mandatory. In general, I believe, changing the established style in an article would be regarded as a major change that should be taken to the talk page for discussion. That would apply as well to the expression of (e.g.) power in watts vs. kW. Best wishes, Hertz1888 (talk) 17:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

As it happens, Hertz has the good fortune to be friends with MOSNUM's most prolific editor, namely moi, and so happy indeed am I to share my humble knowledge to enlighten my fellow editors. As good Hertz has pointed out, MOS:DECIMAL gives clear guidance on the decimal point (always "dot", never comma) and grouping of digits (either spaces or commas, never dots). Where MOSNUM gives no specific guidance, Wikipedia does not, in general, say "do what the governing standards body says to do", because (it turns out) there's almost never any one governing standards body for these questions. Instead, WP's rule is to look to the sources on the article topic to see what they do. Usually on a given topic there's a clearly ascendant practice (perhaps because they're all following some standard -- but that's up to them) but if not, editors need to talk it out on the article's Talk page. See [8]. EEng (talk) 19:56, 17 August 2014 (UTC) P.S. I rush to clarify that my extensive editing of MOSNUM focused on clarifying the presentation of the guidelines as they existed -- very little of their substance comes from me.

It's nice to have such friends, and they're so knowledgeable (if not always modest). Hertz1888 (talk) 04:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Au contraire -- I pride myself on my modesty. EEng (talk) 19:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the extended explanation. I guessed there would be no governing guideline for decimal comma's or dots on WP. But from your explanation (Denimadept) is shows that the majority of the world's population uses the decimal dot. Therefore, my intended alterations of the page would be less effective for the (ideal) viewer population.

46.227.236.78 (talk) 12:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Speaking of modesty

Check out the "Sacred Cod" link at upper left here [9]. Note the hover text that pops up when you mouse over! (A kind friend sent it to me.) EEng (talk) 19:31, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Why a "set"?

Early responders. The first responders are on a coffee break.

All in a day's work. EEng (talk) 12:27, 17 September 2014 (UTC) P.S. I've frequently wanted to ask you... why is your username Hertz? P.P.S. Something I was very struck to learn some years ago was the origin of the term "set" with reference to early radio contraptions (and then later, by apparent habit, to any pretty much any radio or TV apparatus even if of unitary design). I can't tell if this is explicitly explained anywhere on WP, but you'd be the perfect man to take on that job, I think.

For the first question, you can easily search ("google") the name and year. For the second, I am not taking on any new projects at this time. I don't know why we call a set a set, and would rather not guess. If you learn the answer, please share. Hertz1888 (talk) 14:12, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh! Based on the previous section I took it as a given you knew. Early radios, "of course" (= I know very little about this) had an, um, oscillator, detector, coherer, amplifier, and so on -- clunky components mounted on wooden boards (the proverbial "breadboard" -- you don't hear that much these days, do you?) -- possibly separately so that different versions of these components could be mixed and matched, depending on (say) the antenna configuration, power supply, today's weather, which transmitter you were hoping to pick up, and your pocketbook. A whole setup ready to be powered on was therefor a "set". Great pics at [10].

What I find interesting is how naturally we use the term "television set", yet it never occurred to me to ask why it would be called a "set", until I ran into an explanation somewhere. However, I'm not sure if I ever heard the phrase radio set after the 1960s (probably only from my Grand Aunt Ruth, born just before the Great San Francisco Earthquake and Fire) and now, I realize, you almost never hear the term "TV set" anymore either. EEng (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. My first guess would have been related to the elaborateness of early radios, possibly requiring more than one enclosure. You may remember Titus Moody on (Fred) Allen's Alley, who said, when asked what he thought of radio, "I don't hold with furniture that talks." Hertz1888 (talk) 15:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you take this one?

[11] EEng (talk) 00:32, 19 August 2014 (UTC)\

Why me? Hertz1888 (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Because you've been saying for a while that you only want to take on easy stuff. EEng (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

FM broadcasting

I would much appreciate it if you would inform me what the multiple inaccuracies are in the section on subcarriers, which I created and you deleted. Thank you.

Specifically, please explain to me why I am wrong about the relationship between channel separation and audio frequency capability. While retired, I was an FCC licensed broadcast engineer. deisenbe (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I can't say what Hertz1888 will say, but I see the text he removed has no citations at all. That's significant. - Denimadept (talk) 22:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I believe that the problem is more (though not entirely) one of not-so-good drafting than it is of stark technical inaccuracy -- that is, I'm willing to believe that your expression of various points doesn't do justice to your understanding of them. However, a prerequisite for even discussing this is that you must supply WP:reliable sources for the material to be added -- ideally (though not necessarily) sources available online, so that discussion of how to express each point in the article can proceed from a common base. EEng (talk) 22:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

You are entitled to know. All of the aforementioned, and more. A combination of problems, with no way to fix them by changing a few words.

It is important to distinguish the baseband audio (modulation spectrum) from the radiofrequency spectrum, which was not done. They are not in a 1:1 relationship. Spacing is specified differently than the span of allowable modulating frequencies. The channels may be spaced by 200 kHz, but the actual channel was established with a +/- 75 kHz (150 kHz) width, plus a 25 kHz "guard band" on each side. The FCC allows modulating frequencies of up to 99 kHz (previously 75 kHz), not up to 200 kHz as implied. A graphic of the baseband is shown in the section FM broadcasting#Other subcarrier services. True, the excess capacity in the supersonic realm can be used for subcarriers, but only to 99 kHz.

There is no "200 kilohertz carrier".

FM band "capacity" was never 200 kHz for the sake of fidelity up to 20,000 Hz. Historically, the main reason for introducing wideband FM was to provide good noise & interference immunity. It was promoted as "static-free" radio, in contrast to AM. Before stereo standards were adopted, it was commonplace for FM stations to transmit 20 kHz audio. Full modulation (100%) was defined as +/- 75 kHz deviation.

AM sound was not, and is not, limited to 5 kHz. Even under current rules requiring bandpass filtering, the upper limit is around 10 kHz. Practical limits are generally receiver imposed, or voluntary. Many decades ago, certain AM stations were noted for high-fidelity audio, and as long as 80 years ago, certain receivers[12] for their ability to reproduce it.

The deleted section duplicates to some extent, and contradicts to some extent, the existing "Other subcarrier services" section. The existing section could benefit from some additional content (well sourced, of course); why start a new section?

Lack of citations in and of itself raised the suspicion of original research or synthesis being involved.

Thanks to each of the early responders for weighing in. Hertz1888 (talk) 06:02, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Request for intervention

User:Hertz1888, Hi. There is a question about what is considered worthy or not worthy of publishing on a WP article page in terms of photos because of what may or may not be perceived by others as distasteful (bad taste). The editor, User:PacificWarrior101, had posted a Commons photograph of Israeli singer and transgender, Dana International, a photograph which I personally feel shows bad taste and tends to "flout" the dignity and self-respect of the Yemenite Jewish people. I voiced my concerns to the editor about my feelings of repugnancy evoked by the picture on a main article page, Yemenite Jews, that treats on ethnicity and, to a large extent, the history of Yemenite Jews. Most Yemenite Jews will feel a sense of shame by seeing this photo of "Dana International" on the page that speaks specifically about them as a people - and who, by the way, are mostly conservative to religious. While I have no personal problems about discussing issues of transgender, here the matter is different. Dana International's photograph on the main page of an article which treats on ethnicity is tantamount to putting up an image of a serial killer on an ethnicity page. Or, let's say, Israeli troops shooting at an Arab child, on a page which speaks on Israeli ethnicity. There should be a place for common considerations as for what is tactful and what is not, particularly when the photo is controversial and evokes shame. See the Talk page on Yemenite Jews, and the sub-section: "Flouting an Ethnic Group." Any advice will be much appreciated by you.Davidbena (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Greetings, Davidbena. I have read the talk page discussion. It appears to me that at this point there is no consensus to remove the photo; if anything, the balance seems tipped toward keeping it. A basic principle of WP is that it is not censored. I don't know of any guidelines regarding the untactful and the distasteful. As an encyclopedia, WP is supposedly not about editors' personal views and preferences. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:26, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Zach, I can see the trend. I have a general sense that the editors are very liberal-minded and do not wish to be told about group sensitivities or insensitivities. I made the one mistake to canvass other editors to join the conversation, without knowing their view. Do you think it will help if I took the issue to arbitration for resolution, or will it be a waste of time?Davidbena (talk) 04:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I have no direct experience with that process, but have observed that it is generally slow-moving. I could be wrong, but thought it was resorted to only when discussions were hopelessly deadlocked. Talk page discussions often need many days, even weeks, to reach some kind of conclusiveness. Who is Zach? Hertz1888 (talk) 04:51, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

My mistake. Sorry about that. I confused you for another, since I had been writing a fellow by the name of Zach. Anyway, your advice is always a help. Thanks, again.Davidbena (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the notification of the discussion at Talk-Mayflower. I have added some information and would welcome any comments. Mugginsx (talk) 17:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Ut Oh -

per the Mayflower article, I have added some references and comments but the editor (perhaps unfamiliar with the guidelines) has NOT heeded your advice and has once again deleted material without consensus. Mugginsx (talk) 13:15, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello Hertz1888, You may be interested in my current contribution to Ali Zifan's Talk page. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:12, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The graphic of Empire State Building

Hi , I was aware that you deleted the graphic about Empire State Building and in my talk page, you said:"You are *substituting* such a graphic for a standard, architectural height graphic in this and other articles." I like to know what is the difference between my graphic and the graphic that you said i substituting (i mean the height of buildings) and why it is disruptive?? I'm pretty beginner user in wikipedia and i don't have bad intention about editing pages. I just wanted to improved that but every time it deleted by you or " David J Johnson".Your answers are:"Pinnacle height is NOT the standard for building comparisons".I know but i like you answer my question that i asked. I don't discuss and i don't want to vandalize. I don't have bad intention as i told. I just like to improve that. I don't like to disrupt the articles. Please tell me why my graphic isn't acceptable? how can it can be acceptable? Also i am not a native speaker of English and don't understand english so good.So please answer me in the best method.Thank you.Ali Zifan (talk) 02:42, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Speed of light. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
While the process of reaching consensus is underway don't repeatedly edit the article to your proposed version, especially if those edits are identical reverts which don't address any of the discussed concerns. If you want to reply to this message please trigger a notification. Thanks. Mario Castelán Castro (talk) 18:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Not "my" proposed version; essentially what has been present longer than four years, except for recent weeks. Hertz1888 (talk) 18:55, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for helping!

I just want to thank you for helping an anonymous Greek like me -with bad English and even worse syntactic skills- after i edited/updated the page about the Marathon, respecting my edit while correcting it/making it better - so... thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.66.21.156 (talk) 14:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Earthquake prediction

Hertz, please consider bringing your talents to the earthquake prediction page. Thank you, Grandma (talk) 03:30, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the gracious invitation. It's a largely unfamiliar subject, but I'll try to help as time permits. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:05, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

The whole page needs a grammatical working over. Grandma (talk) 04:26, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done. It wasn't in too bad shape and didn't take long to tidy up. Hertz1888 (talk) 15:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for link-fix

For this. I only had time to undo the link-spammer, you actually made the entry *good*. DMacks (talk) 06:53, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

And thanks for doing *your* part, too. Hertz1888 (talk) 15:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Sources needed

[13] EEng (talk) 15:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Already sourced in article (note 1)! See p. 16 here. Hertz1888 (talk) 11:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I fear I expressed myself too subtly. My specific concern was the idea that Kittredge had "walked across the Charles". EEng (talk) 18:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Not you. I missed the humor, focusing instead on the considerable distance likely involved (unless the "Boston" referred to was Allston). To think that the original WP editor could have avoided ambiguous and amusing readings by adding a couple of commas. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Second chance

If you miss the humor here, maybe take an Extension course brushing up on Arch Amusement. [14]. EEng (talk) 05:31, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

How titanic was that widow? There must have been a lot for that explorer to explore. Hertz1888 (talk) 05:42, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh, Mister DRIFTWOOD!. EEng (talk) 16:53, 30 September 2014 (UTC) Actually, she was fairly svelte -- see the photo near the head of the Widener article. EEng (talk) 16:53, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

BTW, I've tried (I think) to get you interested in participating on Phineas Gage on and off, and I'm gonna try again. Things have calmed considerably and we could use a 3O there on a current discussion (or two, actually). I feel OK calling you in since, while we've been pals for some time, I really have no idea what your feelings might be on this stuff. One question is a rather esoteric one about how notes and refs interact and should be formatted (Talk:Phineas_Gage#What_is_our_goal_here.3F), and the other is about the volume of notes in general Talk:Phineas_Gage#A6a_A_substantial_part_of_the_text_is_hidden_away_in_these_notes._These_complex.2C_rambling.2C_and_citation_filled_messes_that_only_make_verification_more_tedious. (and maybe other stuff about notes too -- I've never had a clear idea what the concerns are, other than that most articles don't have notes). The other major participant, Tryptofish, is (I believe) Crimson-hued as well so it will be just like Old Home Week. (The somewhat fractured section headings on the talk page are from an "issues list" by an editor who seems to have lost interest. (See [15] for background, if you care.) EEng (talk) 19:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I see. You choose earthquakes over Phineas Gage. Harrumph! EEng (talk) 11:50, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Knock it off, Driftwood. Time doesn't permit much of anything these days. Hertz1888 (talk) 13:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Really just reminding you that you're needed and appreciated. BTW, did you know

... that in Menace from the Moon, a lunar colony‍—‌founded in 1654 by a Dutchman, an Englishman, an Italian, and "their women"‍—‌promises Earth heat-ray doom unless it helps them escape their dying world?

EEng (talk) 19:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know about the novel, which looks like fun. I will enjoy reading the article about it. As for the first matter, it's nice to be reminded of that, and I hope you know you are appreciated too, even if I've declined your entreaties to plunge into major Phineas-editing. I have had to cut way back on WP involvement and other activities the past year and a half, mainly on account of health-related issues. Perhaps someday things will return to normal (whatever that is) and the full story can be told. Very best. Hertz1888 (talk) 08:16, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Novel's pretty much a potboiler, actually. But I like to think my writeup in the article injects what little life is possible. (It was an actual DYK.)

BTW, did you catch the incident in which I was grilled on the witness stand? Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know/Archive_111#When_the_humor-impaired_become_admins EEng (talk) 14:22, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

The only exercise some people get is by jumping to hasty conclusions. If they hold a roast for you, look out for those heat rays. Hertz1888 (talk) 15:36, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

How limited. What about running people down (cardio), dodging responsibility (maintains flexibility), stabbing people in the back (hand-eye coordination)? EEng (talk) 16:45, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Nothing like verbal fencing to keep one on one's toes. You lifted my spirits (how about getting your own booze?), but let's not get exercised about it. You deserve an honorary M.M. (master of metaphors). Seriously, I think those are really good ones. Thanks! Hertz1888 (talk) 22:58, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Inquiry as the Title protocol

There are two articles entitled Watford. One is Watford, (in Hertforshire) another Watford, Northamptonshire. Watford, Northamptonshire is allowed its full name but when I attempted to do the same on Watford Hertfordshire, I was reverted and it is once again entitled "just" Watford.

This seems inconsistent to me and I asked the editor who changed the title name back to "just" Watford and have not received an answer. He may be correct but I cannot find anything in the guidelines as to Titles of Articles that does not allow me to add the location to both, rather than just the one.

Would you please direct me to the guideline, or explain the rationale which prevents Watford, Hertfordshire title but allows Watford, Northamptonshire? Thanks. Mugginsx (talk) 14:29, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

What is most likely thwarting your attempt is that the page Watford, Hertfordshire already exists as a redirect to Watford, created only yesterday. You may be able to swap them (bearing in mind that in so doing you would be reverting another editor's move). As to how such swapping is done, I refer you to WP:MOR. The redirect page's edit summary reads: "Kanguole moved page Watford, Hertfordshire to Watford over redirect: although there is also a Watford in Northamptonshire, this one is clearly the primary meaning of the name". Hertz1888 (talk) 15:42, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Mugginsx (talk) 15:56, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

What is NFCC#8

You gave that as a rationale for deleting a picture at Jerusalem. Just curious - sounds like some new genetically-engineered drug. Tnx --Ravpapa (talk) 05:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

No I didn't; you have me confused with somebody else. It does sound druglike. WP:NFCC may be helpful. Hertz1888 (talk) 07:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Oops, it indeed wasn't you, it was someone named Hullabaloo. I guess I've been taking too much NFCC#8. But thanks, that is the answer. --Ravpapa (talk) 08:10, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks a lot both for first correcting my edit and then reinserting it and separating the paragraph. And while I'm writing, a big thumbs up for the overall work your doing, I've seen your edits on several articles and they are always very constructive. Keep up the good work! Cheers Jeppiz (talk) 15:28, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the good words! Just between us (as I don't want to embarrass you), it was your own edit that merged the first two paragraphs—inadvertently, I'm sure. I'm glad we got it all straightened out. The Jebusite origins are certainly a fundamental and important addition to the article. Best wishes, Hertz1888 (talk) 15:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, that's very kind. You're absolutely right, I'm too tired today. Thanks again for all your help!Jeppiz (talk) 15:57, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

James Clerk Maxwell

Hi, you may be interested in the following diffs relating to the issue of Maxwell's nationality: [16] [17]

As this issue actually applies to many pages dealing with Scottish people I do not understand why these two editors are desperate to change this particular one (which has shown Maxwell's nationality as Scottish since 2006). I also note that the IP editor has recently sprung into existence with British nationality as his sole editing activity!

I believe that changes to the practice of assigning nationality to the particular constituent nation should be discussed as a general point, not via a single article, and have suggested that Wikipedia:Nationality of people from the United Kingdom would be appropriate, but this is ignored.

Am I misguided? Thanks, FF-UK (talk) 18:25, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Not at all, in my opinion. Please bear with me for a fuller reply when I am able. Hertz1888 (talk) 07:45, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Please see: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

How should we show the nationality of a person in WP?

Thanks FF-UK (talk) 16:03, 8 December 2014 (

Jerusalem

Hello Hertz1888, can you please have a look at Jerusalem? There's a user that is scattering around things without any source, e.g.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jerusalem&diff=637330284&oldid=637305356
* https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jerusalem&diff=637302398&oldid=637092889

Also this category has been created with a list of Historic Palestinian capitals which does not reference any source.

Of course I am not entering politics here, which is what this user is trying to do?

Thanks.

Besposito70 (talk) 20:17, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Lingue franche

Lingue franche is an accepted plural for Lingua franca with Wictionary and the one most often used by linguists. Best, Eklir (talk) 18:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

That wasn't the problem. As indicated in follow-up edit summary, disruption of word flow rendered the whole edit incoherent & suspect. I trust all is well now. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:09, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Era style lamentations

Not sure how to respond. The page does not have an obvious comment box! My response to your message is simple: Wikipedia are currently bombarding users with appeals for money, yet continue to operate an unbalanced editorial policy. Specifically, the replacement of AD and BC with CE and BCE is anti-Christian. Many Christians use Wikipedia, and your attempts to deceive them or mock them is sickening. I expect you will simply delete this and bar me from editing, but that will simply prove that I am correct! [78.144.84.60, 15 December 2014‎]

Unsigned comments replied to on IP's own talk page. Hertz1888 (talk) 02:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Swing span

What, you mean they couldn't build it with a swing span? I admit, using hammers and cutting torches and other such tools makes it easier, and lifting a swing span to use it as a tool might crimp most people's style, but...  :-D - Denimadept (talk) 00:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Right you are. Certainly would cramp my style. Such a mix of ideas (hopefully now all sorted out), and that one didn't even occur to me. You draw great, amusing mental images. Thanks! Hertz1888 (talk) 00:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

What you've got there now is better, no question. And not even King Arthur would try to cut down the biggest tree in the forest... with a herring! - Denimadept (talk) 02:40, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I was trying to figure out how the previous grammar could work, and that's the best I could come up with. Built with a swing span. Most people might use a hammer, but no, these people were giants in their field! - Denimadept (talk) 02:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK?

Template:Did you know nominations/Smith Campus Center.

Next up: Peabody Terrace, which was (apparently) originally called the Married Students Housing Center. The Crimson carried a photo captioned, "University Moves to Thwart Early Marriages". EEng (talk) 07:29, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Template:Did you know nominations/Peabody Terrace

Good job on both articles! You've made what could be dry and pendantic fun to read. "Renaming and planned renovation": inspired by "Ren. & Ref."? Hertz1888 (talk) 03:04, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

You may have noticed I only write articles that go in Category: Subjects about which Harvard-associated people have made dry, witty remarks. EEng (talk) 03:20, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

• At Widener Library#Widener Memorial Rooms, I'd be interested in knowing whether the significance of the vertical juxtaposition of images is apparent. (Hint: See text mention of "line of sight".) I'd appreciate your keeping an eye on the GA review currently underway -- eventually a 3rd opinion may be helpful e.g. re quantity of images and use of quotations. I trust you are well and are having a good new year. EEng (talk) 07:18, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Photo of Karl Marx in photo gallery of WP article "Jews"

User:Hertz1888, Shalom. It seems to me that there is a greater consensus to add Karl Marx's photo in the Photo Gallery over that of Natalie Portman. Can we take a vote on this?-Davidbena (talk) 00:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Discussed many times on talk page and always controversial. Marx, as you may know, was very much an anti-Jew. Consensus is not achieved simply by voting. The overall makeup of the montage, including the decision to remove & replace an existing image, is also a matter of consensus. Please take further discussion to article's talk page. Hertz1888 (talk) 00:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I have addressed the subject on the Talk page, in the same place where it was addressed earlier. As for Karl Marx being "anti-Jewish," this is a dark-side of his life. Notwithstanding, he is still considered one of the most influential Jews in the world, or even persons, generally speaking. In my humble opinion, I think that when showing representation of any particular ethnic group, we should take into consideration that person's general fame and acceptance by a large segment of society, whether we agree with his personal life or not. Davidbena (talk) 00:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Falafel

"All the uses are 'sometimes'; 'usually' is reasonably the emphasis."

I agree, except I don't think falafel is usually served in a pita.

Hessamnia (talk) 13:08, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Maybe you could find a better word to use instead. As always, something that can be reliably sourced would be best. Cheers, Hertz1888 (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

"often"? "preferably"? - Denimadept (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Hessamnia: I think you're right, "usually" is probably incorrect wording. Thanks, Denim, for stirring the pot and helping me focus on this deeply fried topic. I am going to try "commonly" (without sourcing) and see if anyone objects. Cheers, Hertz1888 (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year

What do you think of the new image layout over at Widener? Do speak up if there's a problem (I use mostly Chrome and IE). And Oh! Mr. DRIFTWOOD! EEng (talk) 04:26, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Surely there is a way to bring back the commented-out images and make them fit. Their removal seems an unnecessary sacrifice. Happy New Year to you. Hertz1888 (talk) 01:03, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

@EEng: Do check spelling of moved page title (oops). Is lack of sleep taking its toll? Hertz1888 (talk) 15:25, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Pushey, much? Yes, I suppose lack of sleep was taking its troll... toll! Here's something sad: Lionel de Jersey Harvard. Embarrassed to say I never knew about him, except I vaguely recall the de Jersey scholarship. EEng (talk) 20:25, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, another very sad chapter in the WWI general carnage story. Thanks for the new article (and the "97%" comment). Soon, I'm sure, you will know much more about "the only Harvard to attend Harvard". And only a few Myles from Boston. Hertz1888 (talk) 21:50, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Here's a useful project, if you wish to undertake it. There are conflicting reports as to whether Lionel de J H was descended from (a) JH's brother Thomas or (b) a some 2nd cousin of JH. Can you see what you can figure out about the balance of probability on this? I hope you are well. EEng (talk) 21:44, 17 January 2015 (UTC) Turns out it's the brother, apparently.

• Check out the last section since I added the "officer's letter". With the exception of a butchered Crimson mention a few years later, this wonderful sentiment seems to have been totally forgotten. EEng (talk) 15:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Massachusetts and Cambridge tall buildings

Thank you for all of the edits, pictures and additional information! I noticed the tallest outside of Boston list was moved up to 250' from 200'. I can see where this makes sense at this time, but in the future if the number is lower, highrises in other cities can be included too (once height is verified, cities like Lowell, Pittsfield and maybe New Bedford might land in here). Also, I need to find the information I saw online about the Green Building being 312' with radar dome. Do you suggest that I add a pinnicle height section to these lists? (This could include Eastgate Student Housing too). Again, thank you! Martin Mountainfister2015 (talk) 11:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

@Mountainfister2015: Credit goes to you for setting up the new (draft) list and major development of the existing one. It is my pleasure to help out. Thanks for your efforts. However, I am concerned that your ambitions for future expansion of the new list may result in an unmanageable project. Lowering the height threshold may produce a list that is unwieldy and can never be fully comprehensive—making any given rankings bogus, and the list of questionable usefulness. Maintaining such a list could be daunting or impossible as shorter buildings (under 250 feet or so) proliferate, as is likely. "Tallest buildings" lists I've seen on emporis and WP seem generally to make do with 10 to 20 items.

Judging from a quick sampling of similar lists on WP, pinnacle height tables seem uncommon outside of major cities; perhaps the information is not readily available for non-skyscrapers. There again, unless such a table were complete, the accuracy of rankings would be compromised. Best wishes, Hertz1888 (talk) 04:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Your eagle eye...

will be appreciated for a final read of Lionel_de_Jersey_Harvard, which will appear on DYK Monday night. I trust you are well. EEng (talk) 03:00, 1 February 2015 (UTC) Oh, and... [18]

Happy to oblige. Good timing on your part—I can get right on it. And yes, my health has improved enormously over the past few months, thanks especially to some excellent doctors. Cheers for now. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Shave and a haircut performed. I took "buried by" to mean "buried next to", and could make no sense of the chronology, so reworded as best I could without having access to the cited source. You may wish to adjust further. The article represents a huge amount of work on your part, I can see, and I trust you haven't been undermining your own health in the process by sitting up very late. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:53, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Excellent. As with Widener, I thought at first, "Oh, I'll just toss off a quick short article", and 1-3 months later... But the praise and adulation from discerning sophisticates repays the effort many times over. EEng (talk) 08:51, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Some of whom want to Lecter you; hardly praise and adulation (though I AGF). Nothing but encouragement and appreciation from here. Congrats. on this latest DYK. I'd say the article is ready to go. Glad I could help. Hertz1888 (talk) 12:42, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Speed of light

Hello, Hertz1888. You have new messages at Talk:speed of light.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Post on my talk page

Hi, I made no such edit; If someone did, it was someone else using my IP.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.133.60 (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

It happens, I suppose. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Update is needed for the Israeli Railway Map, because Netivot is now connected to the railway line to Sderot and further request

Hello.

The Israeli Railway Map needs to be updated, because Netivot is now connected to the railway line to Sderot with the opening of the Netivot train station on Sunday 15 February 2015 (almost exactly one year after the opening of the Sderot train station on 14 February, 2014). The railway line between Sderot and Netivot needs to be colored in blue.

Thank you.

PS: Could you create an additional railway map of Israel, again showing Israel with its post-1967 borders but without Sinai, in order to enlarge the map of Israel, because the fonts used for the place names are too small even with the largest zooming of the image. Better yet, could you please enlarge the fonts of the place names?

The original loader of the maps, User:Mapeh seems to be inactive or has withdrawn alltogether. An earlier version of his Israeli Railway Map showed only Israel with its post-1967 borders but without Sinai. Could you create this map as an additional map, showing the railway lines (current, under construction and planned), and importantly with enlarged fonts?

Thank you.

Sorry, there must be some mistake. I do not create or edit maps, and have no connection with the ones you mention. I can't help you. Hertz1888 (talk) 02:22, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Greetings from a humble earthling

Thanks for improving what I wrote. I'm interested in space aliens. Proxima Centauri (talk) 11:32, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Tanit

Hello, Hertz! I wonder if you would mind reviewing some recent edits to the article on Tanit? It is this edit and subsequent edits: [19]. CorinneSD (talk) 04:05, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done Unable to judge merits of recent addition, but performed general cleanup on existing text. Hertz1888 (talk) 05:01, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

O.K. Thanks! CorinneSD (talk) 05:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Tasteful and uplifting

Template:Did you know nominations/Dr. Young's Ideal Rectal Dilators EEng (talk) 13:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Forcibly withdrawn? Ouch! Hertz1888 (talk) 13:59, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, after the FDA clamped down on them. Surely that drives the point home? EEng (talk) 14:18, 22 March 2015 (UTC) Couldn't resist, you see.

[silence] (politely declining to suggest what should be done with this information). Hertz1888 (talk) 14:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

We'll, I'd been carrying the bulk of this material around for some time and I'm glad to finally get it out of my system. Getting started is the hardest part, of course, but once I got going I felt greatly relieved. EEng (talk) 18:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hilarious. DYN that two-thirds of a pun is P-U?

At least we know there's an end to this discussion. Hertz1888 (talk) 19:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

What's DYN? EEng (talk) 20:07, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Big oops. DYK. Hertz1888 (talk) 20:14, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, there's some static on the line... did you say big poops? EEng (talk) 20:31, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Enough already. This discussion has pooped out. Hertz1888 (talk) 20:58, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Hertz

This sentence still doesn't work for me: Most casual observers would consider the entire sky fully dark when astronomical twilight is just ending in the evening (at astronomical dusk) or just beginning in the morning (at astronomical dawn). I know what you mean by it, but it would be darkest in the morning "before" astronomical dust began, not beginning, and then "after" dusk, not just ending. That's why I reversed the copy the first time. I see the improvement you made there, but technically, it still isn't quite correct. Am I right? Or is the secret word there "Casual"? If it is casual, then the entire paragrapgh is useless. It should just state the facts, and say it is darkest after dust, and before dawn. Why confuse the public with rhetoric?:Your Pal:Pocketthis (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

You certainly were right to object; on close scrutiny I could see it was too confusing to be of much use. It never was my rhetoric (someone else put it there). Rather than try further patching, I have overhauled almost the entire section. Please see how you like it, and modify it if you see fit. Cheers, Hertz1888 (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

• I never gave much thought to those observing the phenomenon from the northern or southern most poles, and now your new text makes me realize why it was originally written that way. However, your new text is clearly understandable, and much improved. The rhetoric in the original copy was raising more questions than answers. Thanks....as usual-Pocketthis (talk) 18:53, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

I think what we're seeing...

...is admitees touring with their parents and listening to those stupid tour guides. Hope you're well. EEng (talk) 12:30, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

More than plausible. If so, the behavior should quickly subside. Perhaps the Colledge can even teach them how to punctuate "statue's". As for the other, well, almost well enough; thanks for asking. Maybe someday the full story can be told, but not on WP. Very best to you. Hertz1888 (talk) 22:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

in a few months I hope to give my Wildly Popular Talk on My Favorite Subject at a nearby Famous Medical School, Perhaps you will be able to attend and I can scan the audience wondering which is you. EEng (talk) 05:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a good (and an en-gage-ing) plan. Please provide particulars when available. Hertz1888 (talk) 21:01, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings and structures in Cambridge, Massachusetts

Page numbers and specific locations added. Thank you for your input.Mountainfister2015 (talk) 20:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

There are some kinks to be worked out, but we seem to be getting there. Thanks for your diligence. BTW, if you're looking for something to tackle, Rindge Towers are still among the missing, and definitely qualify height-wise, regardless of the ever-changing figures in Emporis (see list's talk page). Hertz1888 (talk) 20:52, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

In regards to the latest revisions (13 MAY 15), do you suggest that I put the specifics from the references into the talk portion of the list? One can get easily lost looking for all of the specific numbers used in the height calculations. Can the list be used as a reference?Mountainfister2015 (talk) 15:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Moving discussion back to your talk page. Hertz1888 (talk) 21:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Mt Zion

Hi. In this case I'm not talking speculatively, or basing my edits on WP-level knowledge, but on firm terminology among professional Jerusalem archaeologists. I didn't use capitalisation for reasons of personal taste. Eastern Hill and Western Hill are used a lot with capital letter, as proper nouns, well defined and well understood. So not guessing, knowing. Google Jerusalem + "Western Hill" or Jerusalem + "Eastern Hill" and see for yourself, over 10,000 hits each. As to the WP guidelines: WP, like any work of reference, is here to help users, which by nature are not professionals (and usually not even WP editors), to find the info they're looking up, in a concise and precise manner. If it fails to do that, all the guidelines become useless, as does the entire WP project. WP guidelines were created for a purpose, keep the purpose in mind and you'll be a good editor; follow the letter instead of the spirit, and you'll be a mediocre one at best. Goes for anything else too, btw. I won't add anything to this; rhetorical duels are not constructive, words in support of subjective opinions are cheap & easily found. Not every bit of established reality or academic consensus needs to be disputed and discussed on online forums, such as WP talk pages. I'll rework the layout a bit as to accommodate taste issues of this or that editor, but if you care about the user, which should be our only concern, then please leave it at this. There is so much missing still on WP in terms of info, so much true research and writing to be done, that endlessly fighting over the presentation form of already posted content becomes silly, even if we leave all other considerations aside. All the best, Arminden (talk) 20:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden

Quixotic plea

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 06:27, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment, please

Talk:Harvard_University#Proposed_merge_with_Harvard_Tercentenary_celebration. EEng (talk) 15:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Blatant incitement

How would you like to do a GA review of Charles R. Apted (see WP:Good_article_nominations#Education)? Should be easy. EEng (talk) 06:38, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Sure. What do I do? It's my first one. ... A redirect from "Charles Apted" would be a good idea. I looked in vain. ... Is that medical lecture scheduled yet? Hertz1888 (talk) 23:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

It never occurred to me you might be a virgin. It's actually pretty easy. I suggest you skim (skim) Wikipedia:Reviewing_good_articles, but really all you need to know is in WP:What_the_Good_article_criteria_are_not.

One important and surprising point: "The Good article (GA) process is intentionally lightweight. Anyone, including unregistered users, can nominate an article and (subject to the next two paragraphs) any registered user can review: multiple votes, consensus building, and committees are not required." (There's a review provision in case someone's aggrieved, and that is by consensus.)

When you're ready to start click here [20] and this will set up the review page. Paste the following in at the bottom to use as a checklist:

{{subst:GAList
|overcom=
|1a=
|1b=
|1com=
|2a=
|2b=
|2c=
|2com=
|3a=
|3b=
|3com=
|4=
|4com=
|5=
|5com=
|6a=
|6b=
|6com=
|7=
|7com=
}}

Then save it. Now the page is set up. As you go through the review, set 1a= 1b= etc. (corresponding to the GA criteria) to y or n or ? (7= is the overall pass/fail). The "com" parameters are for comments, if any. Does that make sense? Thanks for being willing, but if you decide it looks like too much trouble just say so. EEng (talk) 02:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Did I say something wrong? EEng (talk) 02:58, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Not at all. Busy time, and I keep getting sidetracked. Sorry for the delay. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:40, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Started. How about a citation for the "feared and beloved" quote? P.S. I am lost already. Where/how do I enter "=y" or "=n"? Hertz1888 (talk) 22:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Never mind latter question. Finally found the way. It wasn't obvious. Hertz1888 (talk) 23:20, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Let me know if you see any other problems. I have a great DYK cued up for this:

... that in 1915 "Harvard Cop No. 1" Charles Apted identified the dynamite-wielding intruder who shot J. P. Morgan, Jr. as wife-poisoner, US Senate bomber, and crazed former German teacher Erich Muenter?

EEng (talk) 14:58, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Followup

Thanks much, and I hope your feeble powers weren't overtaxed. For future reference there's some followup stuff at Wikipedia:Good_article_nominations/Instructions#Passing but I took care of that for you.

WRT your comment "entertaining as well as informative", you realize, do you not, that some people think that any care or concern for the reader's pleasure is somehow undesirable -- "unencyclopedic", in the elastic vocabulary of the dull and adamantly certain.

Now there's one other thing. The purpose of getting GA status was to qualify for a DYK appearance, but here's the thing. Once the approval happens, that starts a 7-day clock for DYK nomination (it's all very stupid), and I realized there's more material that I wanted to add before that happens. Not wanting to end up behind the 8-ball, but also not wanting to mess up your review already in progress, I did that work in my sandbox. So in a minute I'll install that expanded version in the live article. You may well ask, "What does that mean for the article's GA status?", and to that the answer is, Nothing. Once a GA, always a GA (unless someone wants to nominate for delisting because quality has badly deteriorated). I didn't plan it this way, but there's nothing unusual or wrong about it at all.

Thanks again. Would you mind my calling on you for other reviews now and then? EEng (talk) 19:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Happy to oblige. Not so feeble and not overtaxed. I didn't realize how easy it would be (though, just as I was thinking that, here you hit me with five extra steps of instructions).

"Unencyclopedic" can reflect a puritanical character streak (what someone once defined as the fear that somebody, somewhere, might be having fun). I'll have to convey my "attaboys" somewhere other than in a review.

No worries here about the added material. Other reviews? Sure, if only now and then.

Is that presentation on Gage going to happen this summer? Hertz1888 (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, it's taking a lot of preparation because it's almost impossible to compress the essential material into an hour, which is already longer than the usual length of this particular brown-bag series, and that's not even allowing for the inevitable questions. I can leave certain things out and bridge them over, but this audience will be specialists and they want a deeper understanding; yet much of the fundamentals, which with most topics one would simply assume the audience already has, will need to be gone over after all because there's so much mythology about the subject. So I don't want to schedule until I have a better idea of how the talk will be structured. I may have to ask to break it into two pieces, which will be a hard sell since I already have another talk I'd like to give on a related but different topic, and that would make three. If you enable "Email this user" temporarily I can send you an unpublished paper you may enjoy. (This doesn't reveal to me your email address, in case you didn't know that.)

Thanks again for the review. It's really easier than most people think unless they make the fatal mistake of talking about things in the review that aren't part of the criteria, or some autodidact shows up to tell others how to write via random guidelines, policies, and essays (this being an example of his own writing) or opine that the swim-test legend isn't germane to the article on Widener. Unfortunately the reviewer didn't understand GA isn't a consensus process, and gave up under the weight of all this baloney. (But I forgive the reviewer -- he's a good guy.) EEng (talk) 22:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Temporarily enabled. Hertz1888 (talk) 22:23, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

As an ace grammarian, would you happen to know the answers to any of the questions here? Hertz1888 (talk) 22:12, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Meanwhile...

Can you identify where this image was taken (in 1915)? EEng (talk) 03:10, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

If you mean the precise location, I'm a frayed knot. The uncropped google books illustration shows a gate I don't recognize. The caption IDs the occasion as Class Day. Perhaps you could research the traditional procession route in those days, a mere century ago. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:56, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Bots

You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

• The simple solution is to simply include the "rawcontinue" parameter with your request to continue receiving the raw continuation data (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&rawcontinue=1>). No other code changes should be necessary.
• Or you could update your code to use the simplified continuation documented at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Query#Continuing_queries (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&continue=>), which is much easier for clients to implement correctly.

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey, did you get my email?

(about a month ago) EEng (talk) 05:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Has it been that long? Sorry about the delay. You will hear back from me. Hertz1888 (talk) 00:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Maybe it wasn't that long. Anyway, sorry about the mixup (described in the email). EEng (talk) 00:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, now it's been that long. EEng (talk) 02:46, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

And now it's really been that long. I don't even remember what I wrote to you about. EEng (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

It was about a possible Gage presentation. I haven't forgotten you. Hertz1888 (talk) 05:28, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Sheldon

Are you related to Sheldon Hertz? My Dad's cousin. Cihenvr@aol.com

Sorry, no. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:26, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Mount Hermon

I also reverted the editor and warned them about the 1R restriction (which of course keeps us from restoring the text, damn!). They ignored my warning, so I've reported them to AN3. Doug Weller (talk) 14:13, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Reverts on Hebron, Bethlehem

Would you care to explain why you immediately deleted my contributions, labeling them "Less clear, less neutral, not an improvement"? If you look up any city in the world, it will say, for instance, "London is the capital and most populous city of England and the United Kingdom" or "Paris the capital and most-populous city of France" or "Grimsby is a large town and seaport situated on the South Bank of the Humber Estuary close to where it reaches the North Sea". Not "London is an English/British city" or "Paris is a French city" or "Grimbsy is an English city". Saying "Hebron is a Palestinian city" seems WP:POINTy. ZinedineZidane98 (talk) 16:20, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Not equivalent. England and France are not subject to territorial dispute or mixed jurisdictions. There are Arab communities in the WB and there are Jewish communities. "The West Bank of Palestine" is novel usage. Your edits introduce problems the existing wording avoids. Hertz1888 (talk) 17:31, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

"Not equivalent. England and France are not subject to territorial dispute or mixed jurisdictions" - Surely that is precisely why it is problematic, isn't it? cf. "Derry". You wouldn't start the article with "Derry is an Irish city" or "Derry is a British city". It is: "Derry is the second-largest city in Northern Ireland". And I can assure you there is nothing "novel" about calling Hebron/Bethlehem a city in the West Bank.... unless you're arguing that "West Bank" and "Palestine" are novelties? ZinedineZidane98 (talk) 19:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

You are misquoting me and yourself. The unusual phrase you used was "the southern West Bank of Palestine", which in itself is less neutral and less accurate than the existing wording that just calls it the WB. Anyway, it's a different situation, with its own usages, much as it may strike you as "strange". Hertz1888 (talk) 19:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that's not an argument. What is your justification for deleting my contributions? Do you have a source? Is there a Wikipedia policy that I'm not aware of? ZinedineZidane98 (talk) 08:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

FYI

WP:ARBPIA3 is now open and evidence can be submitted until September 8. 62.90.5.221 (talk) 09:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Converting hyphens to em-dashes

When I was making that edit I felt SO GUILTY about it. I figured I'd just go back later and fix it, but now I don't have to. Good eye there, lol.

{ $\mathbb {JPG}$ } 06:38, 3 September 2015 (UTC)