User talk:Savant13

This user is a recent changes patroller.

Welcome

Hello, Savant13, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

Species numbers for higher order taxa are hard to come by because the definitions themselves, change from authority to authority, and the numbers can differ by an order of magnitude or more. You can go to AlgaeBase.org and look up species numbers for some of these, and insert them, referencing AlgaeBase in the pages. I'm working slowly through some of them, but mostly the physiology and ecology--I'm not that interested inspecies counts, but I agree it is basic information that should be added. Thanks for taking the time to note where it is missing. KP Botany 22:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your point about number of species is well taken, but you should not use a reference to Encarta which is volatile and anonymous but rather to a scientific source such as AlgaeBase which is at present the best database for species names of algae.--Daniel Vaulot 14:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you really can't use Encarta or another general encyclopedia for information of this nature. Daniel has carefully qualified AlgaeBase to precisely what it is, "at present the best database for species names of algae." In addition, it's easy to use, it's readily searchable on the web by anyone, and it lists its references, so if you want to double check its data you can, or if it cites an authority who is somewhat controversial, you know it--it is one of the best done organism databases on the web because of these reasons. However, if you don't want to use AlgaeBase you may use a recent textbook on algae, instead. Either way, simply quote whatever source you use, as this is something in serious flux and disagreement among phycologists. Cheers. KP Botany 16:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About adminship

Regarding your comment here. It might make sense for you to run in a few months, but right now most people will argue that you do not have enough experience on Wikipedia at this time. JoshuaZ 01:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspected as much. When you say it might make sense for me to run in a few months, is that based on my history, or merely a statement of possibility?

- Some combination thereof. I looked briefly at your contribution list, (ok, I cheated slightly, I only looked at the last 20 edits, and at your edit count totals). Given that you seem to be editing more and more in the last few months, and presuming that that trend continues, it is likely that you will be an acceptable admin candidate in a few months. Your edits seem to be a of a high caliber and you are using edit summaries (for reasons I don't understand, a high use of edit summaries seems to be important to a lot of people on the RfA page). If I were you I would keep editing and see again in a few months (often the way to know, is when a respected user tells you they want to nominate you). JoshuaZ 01:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Vandalism

When reverting vandalism, please put user warning templates, such as those found at WP:WARN, on the talk pages. An issue came up with the frequent vandalism of the page Big Bird by the IP address 67.76.231.222. To get a user blocked, they have to receive a series of warnings(usually 2-4 within a given period of time) and then after vandalizing past the final warning, they can be blocked without further notice. I recently tagged the with the final warning, but in the past few days, they had vandalized the page 6 times, and could have been blocked sooner. Please tag them, so that they may be blocked sooner, and Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!--Vox Rationis 14:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surface Tension

You removed two pictures, not just the one with the coin. Also, the photo with the aluminum coin does illustrate surface tension, even if there is an air bubble hidden under it (although I see no evidence that there is). That the object is born at least partially by surface tension is evident by the curveture of the liquid surface at the edges of the coin. BTW the coin is a small aluminum coin that could conceivably float on surface tension if it can be prevented from being wetted. Karl Hahn (T) (C) 19:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relativism

Look me in the eyes and tell me it isn't OR

Regarding the seeming apparent contradiction between the absoluteness of "all is relative", consider that the absolute can, in theory, only exist in whole (monism) only if everything within (relative to) that whole is relative to everything else (also relative to that whole)--"absolute relativity".<<confuses metaphysics with epistemology>> A visual representation of this could be a number of points all connected to each other.[1] However, this can lead to a sort of "fractal absolute relativity" in which, simply by zooming in or out on the "contained absolute relativity" can result in nested absolute relativities[2]<<editor's own page>>--and can also be represented by enclosing a circle ( ) with a larger square touching the circle's outsides [( )], then enclosing the square with a larger circle touching the square's corners ([( )]), and so on infinitely. The contradiction of "absolute relativity" appears and disappears relative to the extent at which the concept is understood (related to).

1Z 02:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an RC patroller, I am bound to make mistakes. --Savant13 22:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry about the whole "editing without logging in" thing! And im pretty sure you wont be able to find what i've been editing! Even as a patroller!(Not a sponge 22:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC))

Oh won't I? --Savant13 22:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dang... I'll have to be more clever about this... good thing the prank I was talking about wasnt up there... Still, you practically have all my wikipedia history! I under estimated you! A lot! You have made your point! =) Not a sponge

Thank you

For your vigilant action against vandalism in the Brahman-Atman Yoga article. I took the liberty of reverting it to the 15:17, 24 January 2007 edit before it was vandalized by Bruce7576 on 03:58, 5 March 2007. Please help us protect this version. Ever grateful, Armando Barrera 20:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cherry Hill Free Public Library

Dude, you're probably not even located in The Delaware Valley!

Take a look at the discussion page for the article... Dan Schwartz, Discpad 22:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I have never lived more than 50 miles (probably less, a conservative guess) from Cherry Hill.

In case you didn't notice, I'm working on creating a history of the western part of Cherry Hill, New Jersey, including the Cherry Hill Free Public Library, Garden State Park, The Latin Casino, the Cherry Hill Inn & Lodge, and the Rickshaw Inn. Given that our family has been extensively involved in the community for almost 50 years; and access to the Inquirer and Courier Post microfilm archives, the articles I'm writing will certainly have some gravitas.

No one has enough gravitas to put the Cherry Hill Public Library in Philadelphia. --Savant13 12:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

A Star Trek quote? Do you want to keep your barnstar? >:( --Averross (u♠t♠c) 15:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I object on the basis of NPOV! --Savant13 12:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're supposed to point your finger nowhere in particular and yell "Objection!" or it doesn't count. It also helps if you put your replies on my talk page. Anyways, curse you and your legal mumbo-jumbo! *Pounds fist on table* --Averross (u♠t♠c) 12:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Averross, you're clearly being naive. I mean, just look at this. People clearly need to have their ignorance placated by sprinkling "I don't agree with this"-tags at their leisure.

Peter ^Isotalo 19:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back at that, I see that I made a mistake. That kind of thing happens ocassionally when you do RC Patrol. --Savant13 19:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert of my edit on Wonder Boys

I understand you patrol pages for vandals, but your revert of my edit to Wonder Boys was a mistake, because I am certainly not a vandal. I am splitting the articles so that Wonder Boys (film) will be the article for the film adaptation (I've already moved the film info over there), and I was in the process of adding the infobox, image, plot info, etc, etc, to the novel's article when you reverted me. Please look into these things before assuming vandalism in the future, yes? I'm going to revert your revert. María: (habla conmigo) 21:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still, that was bad judgement on your part. If you had thought I made a "bad edit," the least you could have done was ask if I made a mistake before reverting without so much as an explanation. I'm not a anonymous IP, I know what I'm doing, and my edits up until this point have been productive -- one look at my contribs would have told you that. No harm done, however, and I've since put the articles in order; it was merely an annoyance. María: (habla conmigo) 12:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hillcrest Mall -- Proposed for deletion

Hi Savant13,

I have noticed you have proposed to speedy delete Hillcrest Mall due to it is nonsense. Well, I have expanded it a lot and I believe it is no longer nonsense. See if it matches your reason of speedy deletion, revise the article, and decide if you still want it speedy deleted. If you don't, please remove the template. Hillcrest Mall is an important landmark of Richmond Hill, Ontario.

Smcafirst | Chit-Chat | SIGN posted at 21:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Masteroff

I am a theatre historian and published author of several books with theatre-related subjects, and the creator of nearly 400 Wiki articles, the bulk of them about the theatre. Furthermore, I have been writing for Wiki far longer than you. I have no idea why you added to this article the insulting template you did. May I suggest that in the future you think twice before being so rash? Thank you. SFTVLGUY2 16:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since it takes only a moment, I suggest you look at an editor's history before assuming an article was "made up." You seem awfully cocky for someone who joined Wiki just a few months ago. SFTVLGUY2 16:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Timme Polok CSD

You flagged the Timme Polok article as G1 (patent nonsense) when I believe it should have been G7 (author blanked). I'm sure it doesn't make a huge difference and I've changed the tagging for the article, but I figured I'd give you a heads up. -- BeezHive (talk|contribs) 12:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mississaugua Golf & Country Club

Your proposed delete of Mississaugua Golf & Country Club is contested. You ought to read the references and the article before proposing its demise. PKT 13:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I sourced Jozef Psotka and add the pic and created category but most info on him is in slovak ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" "S.P.E.C.T.R.E"} 13:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit dispute

Would you please weigh in with your opinion at Buddy - The Buddy Holly Story? Thanks for your opinion either way. -- Ssilvers 18:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Atheism

See my reply at Talk:Atheism. — BRIAN0918 • 2007-04-03 14:12Z

reverting vandalism of my talk page

just a quick thanks. --barneca (talk) 13:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism template

You appear to be posting an incorrect template - {{wp-vandalism4}} - in both here and here - Tiswas^(t/c) 16:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert valid changes

Kindly use more discression when reverting changes. You have reversed my attermpts to clean up the talk page for this IP. If you bothered to read the FIRST ITEM in the page you would understand a little better. Kindly do so, and I trust you to clean up that page yourself. --196.25.255.250 13:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arrgg. The IP keeps changing, because it is a set of load-balancing proxies. --41.242.15.234 13:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Niether page has anything on it or a page history. Sorry. --Savant13 16:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bite me

fuker —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.15.127.253 (talk) 13:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Is is just me or is the fact that a bot signed the above simply hilarious? Pascal.Tesson 13:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AIV

see [3]

you'll note that User:Ryan Postlethwaite removed the AIV notice as it was an attempt by disruptive editor User:Purgatory Fubar to use AIV blocking mechanisms as a tool to win an edit war. cheers.

I was unaware of this. --Savant13 12:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reason for revert..

I archived the talk page b/c it's in the past... (Sharon - talk)

Then why does the vandalism continue? --Savant13 16:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your offer for a third opinon

Thank you for your offer. Do you think I have been disruptively editing Talk:Global warming? If so, how could have I been less disruptive? --James S. → talk 15:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The straw poll in question is at Talk:Global warming#Straw poll. --James S. → talk 16:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am most specifically interested in why you think it was wrong to start the straw poll. There have been dozens of such polls in the history of Talk:Global warming, and none as far as I know have ever ended up like this one. I am confident that when you read the sources I have cited, you will at least be on the fence if not in agreement with me on all three issues. As for stop trying to get the article changed, I don't know what to say -- if you had peer-reviewed information contrary to hegemonic assertions on a major article, would you want to keep quiet about them? --James S. → talk 16:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a couple of straw polls from archives[4][5]. --James S. → talk 16:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7

Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 21:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Tahash Timeline

Please look at the article Tahash, and on the Discussion Page: "Consensus on Timeline" give your opinion about the Timeline. Thank you. --Michael Paul Heart (talk) 12:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]