User talk:Fiziker

If you go in for argument, take care of your temper. Your logic, if you have any, will take care of itself.

—Joseph Farrell

Can you explain your edit to the Planck units article?

that is what the edit summary line is for. even though your change introduced no falsehood, and, for the most part the Planck length and Planck time (as Planck mass) are all defined sorta simultaneously, why did you bother to make that change? r b-j 15:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was not sure what to lable my edit so I left it as is. The origional showed the the

l_{P}=ct_{P}

, which is perfectly fine but the definition of

l_{P}

is the radius of a black hole having the a mass of

m_{P}

and not in terms of

t_{P}

. However,

t_{P}

is defined as the time it takes to travel one

l_{P}

at the speed of light. David618 17:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

actually, the definition of Planck units is whatever they have to be to make those 3 (or 4 or 5, depending on who's counting) dimensionful constants, c, G, and

\hbar \

, all equal 1 in terms of these units (and then disappear from equations of physical law). it is a matter of solving a posed physics problem that you get the Planck mass being approximately the mass in which the Compton wavelength is approximately equal to the Schwartzchild radius which both would be approximately the Planck length. the edit is okay (which is why i hadn't done anything about it), but seems sorta unnecessary to me.

BTW, it was nice to answer on my page, but if you leave an initial note on someone's talk page, you might expect them to answer on their talk page. (you can put it on your watchlist until you're done with the conversation.) you might not want to expect them to go out of their way to answer on yours.

best, r b-j 18:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Harvest

Welcome to Wikipedia. We're delighted to have you, but the page you created seemed to be something other than an encyclopedia article. It was therefore tagged to be considered by an administrator for deletion. If you intend to explain why you disagree with a proposed speedy deletion, you may find it useful to insert the template "hangon" into the article prior to writing your explanation. This will alert administrators to your intention, and may permit you the time to write your explanation. In the future, please refrain from creating articles that serve no purpose but to disparage the subject, it is considered vandalism. Thanks. Accurizer 16:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to Talk:Dark Harvest. The page you saw was merely a place holder. David618 16:38, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. In the future you may want to refrain from creating an article that way to avoid it being tagged for deletion. Thanks for your contributions. Accurizer 16:40, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I wanted to create a place holder so a friend could create most of the page. David618 16:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Whig Party (United States), are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. Tvaughn05 _e ^(Talk)_(Contribs) 02:27, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My appologies I clicked the wrong thing. I thought I had removed the vandalism. Thanks for reverting that. David618 02:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Godmode-light.js

To install Godmode-light, just create a page at User:David618/monobook.js (or whatever skin you use), and make it contain the following line:

document.write('<SCRIPT SRC="http://sam.zoy.org/wikipedia/godmode-light.js"><\/SCRIPT>');

Then flush your cache. (Mozilla/Safari/Konqueror: hold down Shift while clicking Reload (or press Ctrl-Shift-R), IE: press Ctrl-F5, Opera: press F5.) +Hexagon1 (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll try that. David618 20:51, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you for supporting me in my successful RFA. Please drop a note on my talk page, should you need assistance with anything, or have questions about any of my actions. -Kmf164 (talk | contribs) 02:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AIV vs VIP

Hi Fiziker. I noticed you added an entry to Vandalism in Progress. That page is only for very specific cases, as described by the page's guidelines. Your alert would be better placed on Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV), where it will usually be processed within minutes. Many alerts that are incorrectly placed on Vandalism in Progress are never dealt with, simply because they become old before an administrator gets to them. Thanks for your efforts. :) --lightdarkness^(talk) 06:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Horowitz's supposed sexuality

I copied and pasted this from the talk page at Vladimir Horowitz

Please discuss the section on sexuality beofore deleting it. We need references to support any claims on Horowitz's sexuality but for the time being this section should not be deleted. David618 18:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, information that has been added to the article should be properly cited at the time of its inclusion. Feel free to re-add the section on Horowitz's sexuality when you have found a suitable and verifiable source. Hamster Sandwich 19:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the edit you recently made to that article. I hope you understand that proper citations are integral to the veracity of material, information and any edits made to the Wikipedia. Regards, Hamster Sandwich 19:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Alard.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alard.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 13:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

‎"‎װיקיפּעדיע‎"‎ and ‎"‎װיקיביבליאָטעק‎‎"‎

sholem-aleykhem David618! Beside ‎"‎װיקיפּעדיע‎"‎ ‎"‎װיקיביבליאָטעק‎‎"‎ stared today. I would be happy if you could help building the projects in Yiddish. a gut wokh Gangleri · Th · T 18:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delaware Valley map

I have some suggestions regarding the Delware Valley map you posted. Kent County in Delaware is not part of the official census combined statistical area for Philadelphia so I think this should be removed from the map. Also, Mercer county is technically no longer a part of the census defined area but is geographically closer to Philadelphia than New York so maybe Mercer county should be retained but just be colored differently. Polaron 21:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. However, I was only adding the map to from another site to fill in the infobox picture. It probably would be better if you were to ask someone more involved with the Delaware Valley page to make the changes because they would be more aware of what the map should actually be. —David618 21:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Metropolitan Area

Just to let you know, CMSAs are outdated and no longer used after November 2003. There are now CSAs, MSAs, and MDs. You should change "CMSA name" to "MSA name". Just a suggestion. If anything, please reply back here on your talk page. —RJN 01:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll change it to MSA, which is what List of United States metropolitan statistical areas by population uses. —David618 01:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to let you know that I had left a message on your talk page earlier. —David618 01:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object to either the CSA or MSA. But the data in the box below needs to match the title above. As it stands, the data below is the data for the CSA. In fact, the state of Connecticut is not in the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island NY-NJ-PA MSA, yet it is listed as the smallest state below. As the rest of the article addresses the whole CSA, I have a slight preference for the CSA title.

Also, the CSA (and MSA) titles do in fact include the states, although I certainly have no objection to leaving them out. 68.193.241.102 01:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)TC[reply]

Well, I am no expert in this field. The articles I have seen mentioned the states but not in the name and it is best to leave them out to decrease the size of the heading. It might be good to list all of the states the CSA/MSA includes. —David618 01:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but I'm not sure how to do it. I tried, but if you would do it that would be helpful.68.193.241.102 01:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)TC[reply]

How to do what? —David618 01:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To list all the states that the CSA includes. (NY, NJ, CT, PA)68.193.241.102 02:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)TC[reply]

I'll add that in. —David618 02:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks68.193.241.102 02:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a brief overview of the Userbox issue

Hi David618, I'd be glad to give you a brief overview over the Userbox trouble that has been steaming for quite some time now.
I found about the userbox issue when User:MarkSweep MarkSweep was going on a deletion spree, and some serious wheelwarring was going on between him and Guanaco, which led to Guanaco being de-sysoped and Mark being banned from userbox edits. Arbcom result
Sadly the situation has only detoriated from there. Sometimes Userboxes got listed on TfD, they was broad consensus (and votes) to keep them, then suddendly some admins started speedy-deleting them claiming T1 (divisive or inflammatory). In some cases they were un-deleted by other admins after a deletion review with "undelete" result took place, only to be speedy-deleted once again. All in all, the situation was a serious mess, people started leaving or taking indefinte breaks (including me). There are several admins who prefer a hard stance against userboxes, but Doc_Glasgow, Tony Sidaway and Mackensen are the first three names that come to my mind here. In any case, I must admit that they most likely act in best faith - believing that Wikipedia should be more encycopedia and less "personal touch", but there our opinions differ - and they have power and most of us don't. Hope that helps clear things up a bit.
BTW, I would have voted for your userbox on deletion review, but I'm still refusing to return to WP till the whole mess is sorted out, and anonymous (IP) votes don't carry weight there :( 84.145.220.95 00:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not used to what people want for an arguement to undelete pages. Do you have any idea on anything I could add to my request? Also, do you believe that any stronger measures could be taken to stop this deletion spree? —David618 00:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a good start is always to request to show the template/box that has been deleted. When users only read "user liberal" they can hardly form an opinion if the box should be restored or not. The other argument that you can give is that it was (I assume) speedy-deleted, citing T2. As T2 is still contested you could (as you already did) argue for undeletion plus listing it on TfD, instead of an outright undeletion, as while T2 is still contested it might or might not be due proces. You might get lucky and get the attention of more userbox-friendly admins, but then again, there are several admins who will outright vote against the box, in best faith. Finally as to what will happen - sooner or later a new policy will be implemented - there are currently several proposals running, the most prominent one from Mackensen WP:MACK. Should one of those turn into binding policy the whole issue would be cleared for good, one way or another. Till then the only other option would be a RequestForComment for the admin that deleted your box, but note the requirements for those before you start one. 84.145.220.95 10:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

T2

It's very simple. We keep explaining why we feel T2 should not become policy, and do so with assertiveness, yet civility. Fortunately, T2 has been strongly opposed by many in the community, so I doubt we need to worry too much about. I am just concerned that admins may become too reckless and do whatever they please, regardless of consensus. Hope this helps! :-) --D-Day^{(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?, on WHEELS?!}) 22:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well the problem is in stopping the admins who are deleting the userboxes. How well know is this situation? I just leadered about it a few days ago when one of the userboxes on my userpage was deleted. —David618 22:58, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am against T2, and I just saw that box on your page, and I'm taking it ;) — Coelacan | talk 02:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]