Archived at User talk:Tannin/030301. Guess that makes me one of the Big Boys now, archiving my user page 'n all. :)
Hi! I want to archive my User talk like you have, so I set up a blank page by adding /ArchiveMar1-2003 to the URL at the top of my Talk page and hit Enter. This made a new page. Then I selected and copied all my User talk and pasted it into the new blank page. I thought that would be OK but none of the links are active ie they have lost their blue color. Any idea what I did wrong? Thanks -- Arpingstone 09:07 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)
Surely the general principle "When you are getting a free meal, don't argue with the cook" is wrong? I'm not commenting on its application to (say) Japanese issues just there, but rather to things like objecting to a "free" meal that you don't want. I have genuine recollections of such things - at school, as part of keeping delayed airline passengers happy, etc. For instance, I don't like curry or mushrooms, and I feel perfectly entitled to tell the catering staff I would prefer to go without. That last even happened to me as an adult, at a training course; the catering staff even tried to bully me into taking something involving chicken and mushrooms as they had run out of the palatable alternatives. PML.
I dont have specific details on Letters Patent regarding Australia but a Letter Patient generally was used by the King or Queen to empower and in some senses create a crown office or give instructions. Though the office of Governor-General of the Irish Free State was according to Irish political theory created by the Irish Free State constitution, it was legally empowered by a Letter Patent from the King (as de Valera found when he tried to abolish the office in December 1936, only to be told by his Attorney-General that he also had to repeal Letters Patent, Orders-in-Council and vast amounts of statute law, otherwise the office continued to exist outside by constitution. He achieved this by a 1937 Act that retrospectively repeated all such documents). The governor-generalship of Canada has regularly received Letters Patent from the monarch (the most recent I found was from 1947 but I am sure there are many later ones: that was only the result of one quick search.) So, unless there was a constitutional miracle in which the Australian constitution was created in a manner unlike any other commonwealth state of the period, you will find that there are Letters Patent dealing with such issues (I presume) as the Governor-General's reserve powers, etc which are also part of the Aussie constitution, just as they were part of the Irish and are part of the Canadian ones. They often deal with issues such as the use of the Royal Prerogative in a dominion. (I hope this makes sense. I am just in after a session of alcohol consumption, so I am relying on my typing to convey what my inebriated brain is thinking!!!) JtdIrL 04:44 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)
Hi Tannin, just took a look at the Australian republican page. Overall it is a great article, I think. I've made a few minor changes. Let me know what you think:
I think they were the two main changes. They don't amount to much but they NPOV terms that previously were somewhat POV and so strengthen the article. JtdIrL 04:52 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)
(1) "Clearly suggested". Yup. That's better. Polling is indeed a minefield! (Should I send you my old undergraduate thesis on this topic? No - I figure you have better things to read!) But perhaps the title might indicate a little flavour: I'm here, that's the main thing: evolution beliefs, creation beliefs, and confused beliefs. I was fascinated by this area. Not that some people don't accept evolution despite overwhelming evidence - that's a commonplace, and the committed ones do' hold (in the main) reasoned, internally consistent views. If you accept their starting premises, then their conclusions are perfectly rational. Nor that most people accept the evolutionary account of human origins: there is some interest in that belief too, sure, but not a compelling subject. No, it was the "confused" people that I was interested in. It started when I read a paper from a Queensland University professor, who (struggling to teach marine biology to some of her first years) did a questionaire poll on origin beliefs: she got the expected 10 to 15% of creationists, 70% or so of evolutionists, and 10 to 20% of confused ones.
Now I looked at that and said "there you go, written questionaires producing crap results again, same as usual." The fact that some respondents ticked "yes" to the world was created in 7 days in 4004BC and then a few questions later ticked "yes" to humanity has evolved over millions of years from earlier species as well (or ticked "no" to both questions - whatever - some really weird answers in there) simply shows that (a), surveys are not to be trusted and written questionaires are the worst of all, and that (b) questions that have low salience to the subject tend to get answered in a very off-hand way - they are not "deciding on a crucial question of human origins" at all, they are "just ticking a few boxes here and there to get this boring questionaire thing out of the road so as to be able to get back to something more important".
Anyway, I decided to spend the year looking into it more deeply, using the very best selection and interview techniques I could, so as to get a clearer idea of where these "confused" people really stood. And I discovered that my first impression was quite wrong: the ridiculous & conflicting answers were not the result of poor survey methods at all, they really were a pretty darn accurate reflection of what poeople believed - not the specifics, but the general pictuure. One respondent put it particularly clearly: when pressed, she said something like "well, I believe in evolution in science class and creation at church". Didn't bother her in the slightest. And she was by no means untypical.
It was, for me, a really graphic demonstration of the social basis of beliefs. We - you and I and other academic-minded people - we walk around talking about "beliefs" as if these are something that is a fundamental part of a person, as integral to them and as unchangable as their height or sex or skin colour. We are predisopsed to this both because of our own habits of thought (we pride ourselves on being "logical" and "evidence driven" and so on, we have long been schooled to think that way, and we thus tend to project our own habits of thought onto others), and because it is easier for us to think about a world in which people are consistent and easily classifiable as (say) "conservative" or "liberal" or "swinging voter", rather than one in which individual people express a bewildering variety of different views in different contexts and at different times.
Indeed, ever since then, I have tried to force myself to remember that beliefs and attitudes are very rarely something that it is valid to think about as "things" that pertain to a particular individual. Rather, it is much more accurate and useful to see a belief as something that only ever exists in the interaction between people. (The people need not be present physically and may instead be abstracted, of course. As, for example, where I am alone but think "what would my mother say about this", or where I am thinking in the context of my membership of a particular peer group.) Anyway, I find it most useful to think of "beliefs" and "attitudes" as being rather like "velocity" in post-Einsteinian physics. One particle cannot have "velocity". Velocity only exists as a characteristic of the relationship between particles. Similarly (in my view) "beliefs" and "attitudes" and "personality" only exist as aspects of a reltionship between people.
Err ... maybe I should have just said "yup, polls are usually crap" and left it at that. :)
(2) I have two small problems with 'perceived' before absurdities. (a) Everybody has particular words that they hate with an irrational passion: that's one of mine. When used as a modifier, it always sounds phoney and condescending to me. (Just a quirk: I don't expect world + dog to share this one.) (b) My literalist streak: there are absurdities in the system. Just as there are absurdities in any other system I have ever heard of. It would be drawing a rather long bow to state that the absurdities of the current system are any more ridiculous than those of (e.g.) the US system, or the British system, or (I bet) the Irish system. Anyway, I took "perceived" out ... stuck it back in again ... took it out again. Wasn't really happy with it either way. Shrugged my shoulders and left it out in the end. I'm not too fussed about that one. Maybe one day I'll come back and recast the whole sentence.
(3) Australian republicanism is a pretty good entry now. Any further improvements in it will be marginal. Time to move on to other topics, I think.
(4) Thanks for your reply re Letters Patent. My question was a rather more general one - not so much about the role of Letters Patent in the appointment of GGs, but what exactly are "Letters Patent"? I looked it up in a dictionary, but wound up fairly vague about it even so. It seems to be used in quite a few other contexts, notably heraldry. Of course, I could look it up in Britanica, but that would be cheating!
Cheers -- T
Date talk (sorry!) - You're the only person who voted for "Encourage Month Day, Year", and you voted for it as one of three (quite similar) positions - would you object if I simplified the list of options by removing it? Martin
Galoshes are mentioned in James Joyce's short story "The Dead" in his book Dubliners so they obviously existed in the early twentieth century in Dublin so presumably in the UK too (damn! We were in the UK then. OK. The rest of it too!) JtdIrL PS apparently Ron Davis (alias DW) has left us. (All together now, AAAAWW! - wiping away a tear . . . nope, bit of dust!)
Hey Tannin: Whats up? It was real nice to hear from you!! WOW your dad used to fly 727's and DC-9's for the great TAA? You dad was a part of the romantic era of aviation.
I, of course, dont remeber seeing any of the great TAA's planes as I havent been to your great country, but I remember seeing photos of them on books and actally even saw a book about TAA once.
When I was little, I used to go and watch plane after plane in the airport, which as I told you in the last letter was close to my house. Avianca, Iberia, Delta Air Lines (my favorite cause thats the first one I flew)...Viasa, Dominicana de Aviacion, Mexicana de Aviacion, Pan Am, Air France....ahhh those were the days man. I had a special spot where it had a hole thru the fence and I could see all the planes landing and take off, maybe hmmnn...Im not sure how many feet, but it looked like they were just across the avenue from me. Eastern Airlines, American Airlines, TWA,Flying Tigers, FedEx, British Caledonian and the lesser known ones such as Capitol Air, Prinair, Aero Virgin Islands, Vieques Air Link...lol..memories...
I didnt become a pilot cause I have diabetes but now with my models I feel Im in charge of decision making and planning of my own airport..LOL
wELL i HAVE TO GO BEFORE THIS FREEZES. Thnaks and God bless! Hope to hear from you soon1!
Sincerely yours, Antonio I Like Buckaroos!!! Martin
Greetings. I have started a new article on mispronunciation. It's a bit rambly, but possibly useful in some ways. Take a look at it if you want, and see if you want to improve it... in a NPOV way, of course... ;) -- Oliver P. 04:15 Mar 11, 2003 (UTC)
Hi Tannin. About your use of — -- (spot the irony there!) I'm all in favour of mdash instead of ugly "--". But a unicode entity is pretty ugly to see in wiki markup. What we have on my wiki is a rule in the parser that turns " -- " into the mdash character -- maybe we should suggest the same to the devs here? -- Tarquin 10:55 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Who? Me? A sysop? I get distracted enough from editing tasks as it is! Besides, I think the current team are doing just fine. But thanks for the vote of confidence. I do appreciate it.
Back to em & en. Good points, gentlemen. In fact, I made that first edit that Tarquin responded to about an hour or even two hours ago, planning to follow up with 30 or 40 others, only all marked "minor" so as to avoid cluttering up Recent Changes with them. But then the phone rang .... OK, I made the mistake of letting real life interfere with wiki editing, but she is my sister, so I guess that's excusable. :)
I'll bring the matter up for wider discussion in a more prominent location, and paste your thoughts in there. Meanwhile, I'll just mention that:
Tannin 12:19 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
hello
For which reason did you rename the rabbit invasion in Australia ?
I renamed RIOA for several reasons: because it's not actually an "invasion" (though it's ofen been called that informally) but an infestation;
oups, yes, that's the word we use in french, I saw it in english, but didnot realise it was not the best.
because it's not very grammatical;
I would not know ;-)
and because it's a rather POV title. (Mind you, I can't think of a single thing good to say about rabbits here in Oz, but surely someone else will sooner or later. I hate the damn things with a passion.)
Rabbits are delicious to eat :-)
The main reason though, was because I started reorganising the entries on Australian fauna and flora, and I intend to add some companion pieces on other feral vermin here: in particular the fox and the cat, but perhaps also the Cane Toad the European Carp, and as many others as I (or you, or whoever else) finds time to do. I'm not convinced that <Rabbit (Australia)> is an ideal title, and if you have a better one to suggest I'd be glad to hear it, but at least this way we can (a) use the pipe trick, and (b) have some regularity between the vermin articles: Rabbit (Australia) and Fox (Australia)? and Cat (Australia)?, and so on. Cheers -- Tannin 00:09 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
Hum, so you want to limit these articles to invasive aspect ? good. But thinking again, I feel that first this type of "low-information" title will maybe lead some people to think it would be easier to include the article in the rabbit one, and second, that it was maybe not a good idea to put a focus on the country.
I am wondering whether it is necessarily to limit these articles to a country (or a continent). Fox for example could be considered "vermin" in most countries where they thrive. Would we have a Fox (Australia) and a Fox (France) and a Fox (England)...since the focus would already be double (the animal and the fact it might be considered a pest), do we really need to add a third focus, the country ? I mean that the reason why the rabbit might be a pest for example if its very high reproduction rate. This is true whatever the place. Hence, if you limit these type of articles to only countries, they will likely be many repetitions among the various pest articles. Besides, even if not true in Australia, an infestation can cover several bording countries (they don't care for political borders :-)). One example might be this Taxifolia caulerpa, an article on it will focus on its invasive character first thing. But it is all over the mediterranean sea, in California, other places maybe? So what about rather calling the article rabbit infestation, and have it not specifically focus on Australia (I agree this one it mostly will though) anthere
Hi Tannin. I've seen your article on emus. It's quite good and extensive. BTW, where did you get that word tweaking from? Arno 11:11 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)
Hey, Tannin - care to weigh in on Talk:Rabbit (Australia) again?
I like the table, and I'll try to use it after I've finished the geese. With taxonomy, I'm using an oldish basis in list of birds, but trying to update as I go along. I haven't a clue about exclusively Australian bird families, so feel free to adjust that article.jimfbleak 06:37 Mar 20, 2003 (UTC)
I agree that we probably need a bird "glossary" although not sure where it should go. Your change to hawk is definitely a step in the right direction. I think that we also have a problem ourselves with taxonomy of birds of prey. My sources have two orders, Accipitriformes, with main famililies Accipitridae Pandionidae and whatever the new world vultures are called, and Falconiformes which is self-explanatory.
You seem to have all birds of prey in a single order Falconiformes, and Sibley's N. American guide puts them all in Ciconiiformes. We can ingnore that one, since nobody is doing American birds, but I don't know the best way forward between ourselves.jimfbleak 16:09 Mar 21, 2003 (UTC)
I like the improvements to list of birds, which make it more coherent. I've been thinking again about the table as in raptor. Although the content is good, I have a problem that the table is so wide that on my browser the text overlaps the table. Is it possible to reduce the width, or alternatively to force the text to start after the table-I don't know how to do this? On the subject of ignorance, you mentioned in a previous message a "move page" command. How do I do that? Keep up the good workjimfbleak 06:24 Mar 23, 2003 (UTC)
Moved over from Talk:Tannin
'Aircraft Types' sounds like a great compromise. Maybe be confused wth something else, but hey. It's the best I could think of.
I'll put a non-formatted plain-text list up within the next hour or so.
Cheers, User:Qwitchibo
tannin, please see message on my talk page jimfbleak 07:09 Mar 23, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. I've successfully moved Merlin to Merlin (wizard), and put in a disambiguate at merlin between the wizard and merlin (bird) jimfbleak 07:54 Mar 23, 2003 (UTC)
On the parrot distribution, there are certainly native species in India, SE Asia and West Africa, although probably fewer than in S America or OZ. There are no native species in Europe or non-tropical Asia, also some species have been introduced or escaped. There are Mexican species, one of which used to extend into the USA, and there is an extinct USA species, the Carolina Parakeet. jimfbleak 08:50 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)
The productivity comes from
I've done articles on black kite and black-winged kite. I wonder if either of these species occur in your region? If so, could you correct range please.jimfbleak 10:51 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)
There's some new stuff at User talk:Karen Johnson you might want to have a look at. -- Tim Starling 13:17 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for Black kite update. I think the Elanid kites are wonderful too. I've yet to see a black-winged in Europe, although they breed in Spain and Portugal, but I've seen them in India and The Gambia. Unfortunately no hope of one ever getting to the UK. If you get an idle moment sometime, let me know why letter-winged kite is so called (or i can wait for the article.jimfbleak
Hi. If you have broadband and real player can you test something for me? Can you see if you can access BBC News 24 live video streaming at 128kbps at http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/live/now5.ram. I would be impressed if it worked downunder. Mintguy
Well thanks, it's nice to be back. :-) Koyaanis Qatsi
Re: Trinitrotoluene: Do you know that "adsorb" is a word, what it means, and that it's not the right word meant here? It's not a common word, certainly, so I'm thinking you might not have realized it could be right. It refers to accumulating liquid or gas on the surface, which is an important thing where explosives are involved. -- John Owens 10:28 Mar 31, 2003 (UTC)
I like Albatross-much more sensible layout too. In List of birds, should Drongo appearin the added detailed list as well, or is this unnecessary duplication? The reason I ask is that the numerous Asian and African genus Dicrurus species are all called "something Drongo", but I don't know if they are distinct from your birds. I leave it to your judgement.jimfbleak 14:24 Mar 31, 2003 (UTC)
please look at Racial characteristics. I just did some basic NPOVing but I believe the article is beyond hope -- please look at the original version too. I think it is just someone's atempt to do an end-run around the race article. Slrubenstein
Spangled drongo is another dicrurus species, same genus as African and asian, so I'll change that. We have human drongos too, but not under that name. I'll read up on wikiprojects, but, as you say, there's no great urgencyjimfbleak 05:23 Apr 1, 2003 (UTC)
would you care helping me with one australian ecoregion (choose your pick). I think having a couple of example would help setting the frame. If you are interested, which area would you be most interested in ? There are only about 30 different ones in Australia (sigh). Ant.
I've done a couple of articles clarifying (I hope) seabird and wader. Unfortunately, I have no idea what group the Chionidae Sheathbills should be in. Can you assist? thanks jimfbleak 16:46 Apr 1, 2003 (UTC)
Then I'm glad :-) Any help will be welcome.
I put an ecoregion map (copyrighted - not to use directly) of Australia here. You are in AA0412. To which one would you give pref ? user:anthere
I've added a good deal to the articles on the history of Brazil (on the years from 1889-1964) and the economy of Russia (on the post-Communist transition). You'd be a very qualified editor, if you want, because of your good grasp on political economy. Those article are unlikley to be edited a great deal since they pertain to issues that are not that contentious on this site, like dictators.
Er, I'm confused. What do you need a sysop to do? Have an edit war? :-) Count me out: my mind is too full of the war in Iraq to engage in one of my own. ^_^ --Uncle Ed 00:06 Apr 3, 2003 (UTC)
I like the beach cricket article! sheep 01:26 Apr 5, 2003 (UTC)
Tannin, can you take a look at Sibley-Alquist taxonomy please? Please adjust as necessary. When you are happy with it I suggest that we sprinkle links liberally around the most affected orders, especially those now in the super ciconiiformes. This should minimise the risk of a taxonomy edit war.jimfbleak 09:14 Apr 6, 2003 (UTC)
Hello Tannin
Birds and habitats.
this is for you as well :-) User:Anthere
Don't worry Tannin, that's a long term project :-).
We have time, it's big, and it will take a long time, so it must be done carefully I guess. Now, the important things to report in each of these ecoregions would be about what threaten each of them. In some, it might be that the level of the sea could increase because of global warming, in others it might be biodiversity because of deforestation, in others it might be structures be built and diverting water (as in Wikipedia:WikiProject Ecoregions/Template2 the water marshes), in others it might be war consequences or whole populations being displaces, or it might be a whole area having been f* up by a nuclear bomb, or whatever. Not easy. But a frame can be built to receive all this info.
But life, with birds, plants, invasive species such as rabbit threatening stable system, or just endemic rare species are important. One step at a time. If Jim and you know and love birds, for each bird you work on, you will know where this bird live (and maybe will it be in only one place), if it is disappearing or thriving (oh, I worked on the french ortolan some months ago), what threatens it in such place, if one specific place is of a major importance for birds reproduction (such as a specific island...) etc...all this is important. Maybe Quercus might help for trees and plants in a similar way... See ya. And, there is no hurry :-) user:anthere
Thanks for pdf URL. The Sibley/Alquist one is out there somewhere too, but I've lost the URL.
I've actually seen one of the handful of zitting cisticolas to reach the UK from the Mediterranean areas, and I've seen several species in The Gambia, but I had no idea that zitter had such an immense rangejimfbleak 19:03 Apr 6, 2003 (UTC)
I’ve made major contributions lately that still haven’t been edited. I’m looking forward to someone with your capability looking them over.
economy of Russia, history of Brazil, Protestant Reformation
JTD and I were just talking about the latest resurrection of Lir/Vera/Susan/Adam as Dietary Fiber. He wasn’t confusing Vera with me.
Thanks for the defense anyway, though.
Em . . . you've lost me, Tannin. I know 172 is 172. There is but one 172. I was talking about our new Lir persona, Dietary Fiber. 172, Mav, a host of others and I have concluded that given DF's behaviour on some pages in the last three or four days, we are dealing with the latest Adamesque apparition. (Damnit. I finished working on a page on the Blessed Virgin Mary and now I'm stuck with the word 'apparition' in my head. Jeez. And I've got candles lit. very churchy. Except I find the soft light of candles soooo relaxing when in an edit war!) Forget apostolic succession (damnit. Another religious reference. I must writing religious pages and turn to . . . sex, sport, the intellectual inadequacies of George W. Bush, maybe back to Irish stuff!) we have the adam succession. Or is it Adam's family? (OK. Corny. I'll shut up now.) STÓD/ÉÍRE 04:40 Apr 7, 2003 (UTC)
Hi. We all need to take it slowly and little bits at a time. And it's just fair to take care of what we know, from the place we know best (hum...am I doing that myself ;-)). Collaborative encyclopedia, right ? Hum...I let some ideas of me there
Hep, your page is getting too big...