Hi, I'm new here.. I guess this is to comment about my changes and stuff right?
Re: Ear piercing: it definitely needs attention, so I recon you probably did the right thing! -- Steinsky 13:16, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hey Pakaran :) I hope you like the place and choose to stay.
Some links that may be of use:
Great work on Sociable number! Here are some tips though;
Keep up to good work :) Dysprosia 03:20, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I didn't bother to check. When I saw the timestamps, I realized that my comment was probably unnecessary, but I don't think it hurts. P.S. Don't forget to sign your comments. ;-) -- Cyan 02:50, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Sorry, my comment in the change on the list of longest reigning popes sounds rude, but it was rather intended to show me smile :) It actually made me smile to read about 24 years and 12 months and not 25 years. Please take my apologies if it was received as harsh, it wasn't meant this way. --denny vrandecic 13:57, Oct 15, 2003 (UTC)
Hi Pakaran, I noticed your edit summary on Talk:Main Page of "...Is there a procedure for listing stuff here?". Wikipedia:Selected Articles on the Main Page would probably answer your questions. If not, then Talk:Main Page is a good place to ask. Angela 01:36, Oct 17, 2003 (UTC)
No problem. Perhaps he should have explained it in an edit summary when he removed it. Doesn't matter anyway. You might want to comment at Wikipedia talk:Remove personal attacks if you feel strongly about removing other people's comments. Angela 02:27, Oct 26, 2003 (UTC)
Well, I've blocked 3 of the IPs, but I have to go out now... Evercat 15:47, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Hi, regarding historical revisionism, I don't expect to be able to maintain factual material on communism in that article but honestly what national communist movement (other than perhaps eurocommunism which never took power) did not advocate and support totalitarian methods or practice them if they were in power? Fred Bauder 04:25, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Laos?, almost believable. Fred Bauder 12:11, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Hi Pakaran, I moved your request for comments on PiFast to Wikipedia:Peer review as that's the place to go for feedback. Angela 23:32, Nov 3, 2003 (UTC)
Regarding Aplank removing comments about him on Wikipedia:Problem users: he actually asked if it was okay on the IRC channel, before he did it.
<aplank> hello Is it OK if I make another page for Adam Carr on problem users?
It is starting to take up too big a space on the main problem users
page.
<Lir> u do whatever floats yor boat
-- Tim Starling 02:40, Nov 11, 2003 (UTC)
This in regards to removing the section on Adam Carr, to a seperate page. As far as I know, nobody has objected to that. Lirath Q. Pynnor Oh, he moved it to Carr's user page -- lol Lirath Q. Pynnor
You're interested in prime numbers? Indeed... They have many interesting applications, and, perhapas more importantly, implications in the physical world...
On another note: what do you think about Phi (1.6180339...)? It seems to me to be an almost all-encompassing number... It's derivation from (sqrt5+1)/2 is also interesting in a multitude of ways...
Are you aware of the anomalous representation of the number 23 in the phenomenal world as a numerological archetype? I think you'll find that if you investigate these three numbers and how they relate to eachother (as the Pythagoreans believed), they appear to be profoundly significant. If you will, mystical... Khranus (6 is also incredibly interesting. Make the connections between its mathematical relationships and its ancient mystical significance. It's quite incredible. 6 is the number of water, of the hexagram, of Man, etc... And it's also the perfect perfect number, if you know what I mean (6=1+2+3, 1,2,3 are all prime numbers, 6 is the smallest perfect number, etc., etc., etc.)
(I noticed that you called this 'bad math'... In my opinion, mathematics, like spoken language, can be writte in a multitude of different artistic styles, and viewed in manifold ways. Mathematics is an artform--logical poetry. Khranus
The Enterprise in AGT had exactly the same hull number as it always did in TNG. The implication was that this was exactly the same ship, having been extensively refitted in the intervening years. Details about it should go on the 1701D page. -- Rlandmann 02:11, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Dude, I love the stretching page - it's hysterical! I dunno if it's really a thing that people actually do (I'm too afraid to google to find out), and I strongly suspect our buddy kingpron is a troll. Still, I'm inclined to copy it over to internet-encyclopedia, but I don't know to write a SPOV version - and I think I'd die from laughing if I were to try. Maybe I'll suggest doing so to kingpr0n. You've made my day. -- Finlay McWalter 02:54, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi Nathan, I noticed your comments about Illuminati. Perhaps we do need to avoid biting this newcomer. He is at least participating on the talk page now, so perhaps he just needs some more help to understand how things work here. What he's doing might well be a result of confusion rather than purposeful vandalism. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt for a little while longer, but obviously you are right to watch his edits and check he isn't reverting without reason etc. Angela 21:52, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi, I see your point but I'm not inclined to protect it just yet. He hasn't reverted for the last hour anyway and is now working on Illuminati Order of the United States instead. Anyway, if it's unprotected, we can see how this user acts and whether they are now willing to try and work with others on getting a sensible article. If it's protected, you can't tell whether they are serious about contributing here or not. Angela 22:09, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Your comment on VfD about Wikipedia:Wikipedians by Favorite Ice Cream Flavor made me laugh. I think you may have put your comment in the wrong place though. I really can't seen any "Khranal influence" in it! :) Angela 04:50, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Actually, that was Martin not Calmypal. I'm not sure it's really a problem. Why do you think it is? I'm going to move it to Meta soon anyway. Angela 05:18, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi, Pakaran
I saw your Village Pump post and I looked at AIDS (I'm reasonably well-informed on ths subject). If you are talking about 66.124.70.106's edits, they all appear to be completely unobjectionable...in fact, whoever he is he seems to know what he's talking about: though there are perhaps a few more words to add on biological markers of relative degrees of susceptibility, he hasn't added anything wrong. Was there something specific you had doubts on?-- Someone else 05:23, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by it makes the project look bad. The article is linking to pages in the main namespace, but the main space is not linking to it. One problem might be of course is that when you click "what links here" you would see that article. However, once it's gone to Meta, that won't be an issue as inter-wiki links don't show up. Angela 05:30, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Oh I see what you mean. It was about the inappropriateness of the links in general rather than the fact there were any links to the main namespace. Yes well, that's Martin. ;) As it's going to be on Meta and anything goes there, I wouldn't worry, but if you have concerns about similar things that are staying on Wikipedia, then do raise them. Angela 05:38, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
As Angela hints this was me initially, though I see Calmypal improved upon them. Nonsense pages deserve nonsense links, after all. Martin 13:53, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I would like to express a heartfelt thanks to: Κσυπ Cyp , Cimon Avaro on a pogostick, snoyes, Adam Bishop , Secretlondon, Hephaestos , 207.189.98.44 , Jamesday, Pakaran for nominating me and supporting me. It is encouraging to know that my efforts over the past 6 months have been appreciated. I prize your actions all the more knowing that many of you were not familiar with my work and had to do some research to decide whether to support me or not (because I limit my contributions to the 750 business/economics articles) . Thank you for the time, the effort, and the confidence.
There was a minority that did not support me because of my name. It seems that half have a problem because they read ?shat? into it and half because of the word ?god?. I find this amazing. The people that read ?shat? into the character string had to ignore the commonly used word ?hat? and pick out a word that has not been in common use for more than a century. My spell checker is currently telling me that the word dosn?t exist. One complainant insisted on converting ?Monad? into ?gonads? and ?Excrescent? into ?excrement?. Another saw ?a dog eating a bone? as a sexual act. All I can say to these people is ?Get professional help?.
As for changing my name, I have decided not to do that for two reasons. One is a philosophical reason. For an explanation, read The Crucible, particularly where John Proctor declares the importance of your name. The price of adminship is too high. The other reason is a practical one. I find it useful to use the same name on all my online activities. It is interesting that two universities and several commercial sites don?t have a problem with my name. Maybe it is not all that surprising since they are not inhabited by trolls trying to forward their cause.
Hope to see you around the business/economics pages in the future. mydogategodshat 03:13, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)