User talk:S.K.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Welcome to the Wikipedia
2 The Humungous Image Tagging Project
3 Article Licensing
4 Return of the Untagged Image project
5 Coordinate system category more appropriate
6 NetSuite
7 Sleepyhead
8 ERP
9 MRP II
10 SAP Business Information Warehouse
11 Diambiguation - Asp
12 "Vendor Neutral Articles"--invitation to discuss
13 Simon de Rothschild
14 Business Process Execution Language
15 Edits in Bug tracking system article

[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

Sam [Spade] 20:57, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sorry about the edits I missed, I'll go and replace them. Regardless, even if <code> is more "logical", it makes no difference in any other regard and is more to type. Wikipedia conventions usually maintain that a style that is started by the original author should be maintained and not be changed to an alternate scheme or style, except for consistency with that original style. Dysprosia 10:41, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

[edit] Return of the Untagged Image project

You were kind enough to contribute to the Wikipedia:Untagged images project; I beg to draw your attention to part 2 of the project - there are about 12,000 more images in need of tagging. Any assistance you could provide would be most welcome. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

[edit] Coordinate system category more appropriate

Hi Nutation was first discovered by the apparent positional changes of celestial bodies in earth-centred coordinates. Although the term can also apply to free and forced precession of other bodies such as various planets, pulsars, and so on, it seldom if ever is. The main and classical use is to differentiate coordinate systems based on the equator and equinox of date, the mean equator and equinox, and coordinate sets like B1950 and J2000. Therefore it belonged a little better under coordinate systems than under celestial mechanics, which has to do more with the orbits of planets, satellites and star systems than with observing the sky. Suggest you put it back. Pdn 12:38, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi Peter, I've changed the category on Nutation back. Since I'm by no stretch of the imagination an expert in this and I see from your page that you're an astrophysicist, I'll leave it to you to make the call here. Maybe you can add the information you gave here to the article, to clarify this for other users? My decission for the category change was based on my reading of the article and the category descriptions, so others might misunderstand this as well. Thanks --S.K. 13:38, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sure - thanks for fixing it back. I am not good at categories (not even Plato's), and I am lazy/busy to learn a lot of Wiki-lore. I will review things as you suggest.

Pdn 00:17, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I fixed up the items you mentioned, but I did not explain "true of epoch" and "mean of epoch" as it was getting long and technical. They are the same as "true of date" and "mean of date" coordinate systems, except that one slaves them to some epoch of interest. In other words, if you were doing spacecraft orbit control for the month of March, 2006, you might not want to deal with the fact that the "true of date" coordinate system is changing minute to minute, hour to hour. Since the changes are small, you might pick March 15 or 16 as an epoch and relate all positions and (I did not mention, for brevity!) velocities to that epoch. If you think I should mention velocities or "true of epoch," I'll add some more.

Pdn 00:54, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I went ahead and fixed a few things in precession, nutation and Equatorial coordinate system. The latter is a bit messy now. Really, in a sense the celestial coordinate system is fixed to the stars; proper motions (actual physical movements of the stars relative to each other) make this inexact, but it is essentially near perfect. It is only the statements that the apparent ideal rotation about the Earth's axis is corrupted by precession that was incomplete, and now it is even messier because nutation is in there, too. I almost took out all that section (eliminating precession, too) so as to make the entry more palatable, but who knows what amateur will be interested in learning more.

Pdn 20:54, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello Peter, sorry for the delayed answer. Thanks for the clarifications. I assume going without the descriptions for "true of epoch" and "mean of epoch" is fine for now. If someone considers it necessary, this should be easy enough to add later. --S.K. 20:03, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NetSuite

Hi, I saw you have contributed a lot to the NetSuite article. Can you please comment in the NetSuite talk page?

[edit] Sleepyhead

Sleepyhead, please do not enlist the help of sockpuppets on this issue. Even if others add this topic back for you, the fact is that your application is not notable. - Sleepnomore 16:20, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ERP

Since you have edited Enterprise resource planning, here is a courtesy notification that I have updated the article, and its talk page, since your last activity there. I have tried to repair what I view as an unfortunate WP:POV, or historical bias, but I still need to address a better way to present information about commercial software, open source, and homebrew. Many facts about ERP are true in one of these three main areas, but totally wrong for the others.

I asked about disadvantages style in December 23 section of Help Desk whose first response cautioned risk of WP:NPOV. There is a potential need to show several commonplace WP:POV that can otherwise risk article contamination, if not acknowledged. User:AlMac|^(talk) 22:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] MRP II

I know it is not neccessary to inform other editors when articles they have worked on have been further modified by someone else, but I just contacting a few recent editors to let them know that I have made significant additions to the MRP II article, and intend to do some more, unless someone objects. In my opinion, most all the ERP articles are stubs in need of attention, while the MRP II article in particular is a bunch of lists. Much more prose is needed. User:AlMac|^(talk) 05:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SAP Business Information Warehouse

Why do you keep removing my link on SAP Business Warehouse? Bigdaddymaj 20:10, 13 January 2006

See my response at Talk:SAP Business Information Warehouse. --S.K. 08:02, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Diambiguation - Asp

You removed the image I placed on this diambig page, stating it is a DAB page as explanation. I've read through Wikipedia:Disambiguation and there are no guidelines or discussions on this matter, are there any guidelines elsewhere on this? I added the image to add interest to the page, while remaining in keeping with the topic. I was hoping you could clarify why pictures should not be placed on such pages. Thanks. |→ Spaully°τ 14:38, 9 March 2006 (GMT)

Hi Spaully, I'd say the picture distracts from the main task of a DAB page: bringing the user ASAP to the page they want to get to. Looking at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), I think this is consenus:

Disambiguation pages ("dab pages") are, like redirects, non-article pages in the article namespace. Disambiguation pages are solely intended to allow users to choose among several Wikipedia articles, usually when a user searches for an ambiguous term. This style guideline is intended to make this process more efficient by giving disambiguation pages a consistent look and avoiding distracting information, such as extraneous links (internal or external).

Hope you agree. And really, no offence intended. Thanks, --S.K. 14:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

No offence taken. Thanks for that quote, makes it pretty clear; although maybe it could be made clearer on WP:DAB. I'll have to lay off making DAB pages look nice it seems. Thanks again, |→ Spaully°τ 15:00, 9 March 2006 (GMT)

[edit] "Vendor Neutral Articles"--invitation to discuss

Please come to Talk:Content management system for a discussion of your current dispute over the "Vendor Neutral Articles". Thanks. · rodii · 14:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Simon de Rothschild

I've tarted up this article which seemed largely based on fantasy. You have edited it in the past, so can I ask you to keep it on your watchlist in case 142.161.164.84 (talk • contribs) has a go at removing stuff he doesn't like. Cheers. Noisy | Talk 12:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this. I didn't have the time or knowledge to do this myself, so I'm glad you did it. I will try to keep an eye on the article. Cheers, --S.K. 09:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Business Process Execution Language

I've re-removed the {{cleanup-spam}} tag again from the Business Process Execution Language. If you don't feel there's spam present on the page, there's really not a need to have a huge maintenance tag at the top of the article. If you feel differently, please join the discussion on the article's talk page. Other options would be adding an inline comment to restrict additional links to only those discussed first, or adding the maintenance tag to the external links section. Let me know you thoughts on if there's still spam there. Kuru ^talk 14:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Kuru, see my response at Talk:Business Process Execution Language. --S.K. 06:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edits in Bug tracking system article

Why did you remove the additions to the list of bug tracking software? I saw in the article on issue tracking software there were many external links. So why are they ok there but not in the bug tracking software list? (I added one link there - my very first Wikipedia contribution - and it was one of the ones you deleted. I guess I'd better get used to that...) Ctrager 00:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I didn't have time for Wikipedia lately, so I'm sorry for a late reply. There are general guidelines regarding external links in Wikipedia as well as guidelines for notability of software, take a look at WP:EL and WP:SOFTWARE respectively for more information. I considered those references to not fulfil either, so I removed them. I'll do so again and ask you to please justify their inclusion if you really think they should be in there. Thanks, --S.K. 16:55, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the references to the guidelines. They make sense.Ctrager 17:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/2E/k/User_talk%7ES.K._c3f7.html"