User talk:Catbar

Hello Brian, welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for adding the note to your website about Egyptian Mau cat. I've removed the copyright violation notice now.

Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Angela. 03:28, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Brian, I made some minor changes to your Woodward Tornado article. While the referenced Web page is similar in outline and some content, I don't believe that we are in danger of copyright violation. Lou I 17:37, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Re: George W Bush: I didn't read back as far as Hephaestos's edit, I was just reverting the comment that he was responsible for millions of deaths worldwide... Graham  :) 00:54, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

If he wins the Nobel I'll volunteer to eat him... Graham  :) 11:39, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Regarding rabies, it certainly sounds like a reasonable hypothesis, I just don't want to imply it's a verified one (unless it is), or the standard, accepted one (unless it is), since one can think of other reasonable hypotheses as well<G>. I always thought it was a difference in biological susceptibility, but that could just my own peculiar hypothesis. - Nunh-huh 03:23, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

copied from my own talk page:

Aw, ya bagged Alexander Woollcott! He was on my 'get to him if nobody beats you to it' list. You beat me to it. Congratulations.

Somewhere, I've read a lot about him. I don't think I've read the Teichmann bio, but I have read a Dorothy Parker bio, and Harpo's autobiography. I think I've also got a book on the Algonquin Round Table - that might have been where I read a lot about him. A very interesting, mostly forgotten character. I'll root throught the stacks and see what I find.

Thanks!

Brian Rock 00:27, 2004 Mar 9 (UTC)

I didn't address his sexuality, though I didn't mention his island in Vermont, though, or a buncha other things; there's plenty left to do, and I owe the library a small fortune in fines, so I can't to do it.

Besides, you got Black 47, and thank the Lord I didn't have to cover that. --Charles A. L. 02:25, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, Brian! With cases like ALFRED NOBEL, it's easier to just turn it into a redirect. We don't keep duplicate articles. You also might want to read up on speedy deletions. All the best, Woodrow 02:14, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi Brian - I note you've called the ZMC-2 as "only metalclad blimp ever built". Does David Schwarz's and Carl Berg's Metallballon of 1897 belong to a different class of airship? Lighter-than-air's not my area... --Rlandmann 02:24, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

hello, David Schwarz's Airship was a rigid. It has had a wooden frame inside. This ship was the first time aluminium was used in aviation ever.

greetings hadhuey from german wiki

Brian, Thanks for your vote on my admin nomination. I was surprised there was support as a result of the only feline edit I've done on WP!

I take it that you know, and like, Tonks? I would have included the oddest thing I know about them, but it might have been applicable only to the one I knew best. She loved green pea soup and didn't like milk. Go figure?!

Thanks again. ww 20:43, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Brian,

I'm glad you think it's been on the whole good work. I'm not sure I can be as sure, as the holes and patches mostly stand out. And thanks for figuring out how to vote. Always good to pick up new skills...

Anyway, Keuda??!! Thanks for pointing them out to me. I'll be on the lookout for one at the next show I go to.

If you're willing to dive into something, I could use some perspective and comment in the crypto corner, from a non specialist. The really technical articles (algorithm innards and such) are a lot easier to do than the more general overview articles, partly because it's hard for an author (and crypto person) to see the places that just won't make sense to a general reader. And of course there are the dumb typos too -- but those are easier to find. If you'd be willing to dip into some of the overview crypto articles and point out places that just don't make any sense, I'd be grateful. Of course, I'll be glad to return the favor for articles you'd like a newish eye on. Maybe together we can exterminate a few opacities.

ww 17:02, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Brian,

thanks for being wiliing to lend an eye. It's not my work that I was looking to overview (needy of such as it is, I'm sure), it's crypto generally. You might look into Topics in Cryptography for an annotated list of many (most?) articles in the corner and start there. You might consider secure channel or diplomatic bag or key or ... It's exactly your non specialist eye which I was hoping to snag as opacity/obscurity and such are hard to see when you're too close to something.

Of course, if you'd like to correct a typo here and there... As for the mathematics, it's a specialized corner, but you might enjoy some of it. General readers aren't so likely to tolerate that sort of article though, so it's not so much of a problem in re opacity.

Anyway, I'd love to hear your comments and reactions. They will give those of us in the crypto corner a fresh perspective and help clean up a technical (but of general interest -- eg trusted computing and Digital Rights management) subject area.

ww 15:23, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I nominated you for adminship. Good luck, and keep up the good work. Meelar 04:49, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)