User talk:Lambiam/Archive 15

; Archives
	Archive 1: January 2006 – March 2006; Archive 2: April 2006 – June 2006; Archive 3: July 2006 – September 2006; Archive 4: October 2006 – December 2006; Archive 5: January 2007 – March 2007; Archive 6: April 2007 – June 2007; Archive 7: July 2007 – September 2007; Archive 8: October 2007 – December 2007; Archive 9: January 2008 – March 2008; Archive 10: April 2008 – June 2008; Archive 11: July 2008 – September 2008; Archive 12: October 2008 – December 2008; Archive 13: January 2009 – December 2009; Archive 14: January 2010 – June 2010; Archive 15: July 2010 – December 2010; Archive 16: January 2011 – March 2011; Archive 17: April 2011 – June 2011; Archive 18: July 2011 – September 2011; Archive 19: October 2011 – December 2011; Archive 20: January 2012 – June 2012; Archive 21: July 2012 – December 2012; Archive 22: January 2013 – December 2015; Archive 23: January 2016 – December 2017; Archive 24: January 2018 – December 2019; Archive 25: January 2020 – December 2021;

Your analysis in IHH (Turkish NGO)[edit]

Please see the talk page in IHH (Turkish NGO), we are discussing some of your recent edits which were reverted on grounds of possibly being a novel analysis of primary sources, without proper backing by a secondary source. Cheers Marokwitz (talk) 07:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Multi-stub listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Multi-stub. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Multi-stub redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maxwell's thermodynamic surface[edit]

Thank you for your work on this article. However, I have reverted your change to the paragraph beginning "Maxwell drew lines of equal pressure..." since the most important thing there is the drawings, also given in the associated image (which is not the Andrews letter). The fact that the drawings were also included in the Andrews letter is significant, but less important, so should come later in the paragraph. However, I have reworded to (hopefully) address your valid concern. I have also reverted a change to the punctuation of the letter which did not match the original. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 22:51, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work[edit]

Adding the coords on Cordoba House!--Epeefleche (talk) 18:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Might you know how to reflect it in the infobox instead of on top, with it showing the same level of detail (not just degrees)? Tx.

DYK for Maxwell's thermodynamic surface[edit]

On 13 August, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Maxwell's thermodynamic surface, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding a change on Ubiquinol page[edit]

Please see my comment on the talk section of the Ubiquinol page; thank you again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Committed molecules (talk • contribs) 16:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MoS[edit]

Thanks for the save with initial capitals ("begin" vs. "use"). Just shows that many eyes find more fine distinctions. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:03, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IHH or İHH[edit]

What is the abbreviation of this NGO? I have opened a WP:RM discussion here, but only one person commented on it, he said it should be IHH as the NGO's English website uses IHH. I don't think so. It should be İHH as the first name of the NGO is İnsan. Turkish newspapers published in English also uses İHH. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:IHH_%28Turkish_NGO%29#Survey and comment. Kavas (talk) 09:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re referendum results[edit]

My apologies. I appreciate that the numbers are changing; when I reloaded the YSK website after you'd made the updates, it gave me the same figures that I'd copied earlier. Perhaps the page I was viewing was a version cached on my harddrive. I'll know to double check next time. Apologies again. Nightw 00:35, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake[edit]

I didn't edit the Chalcedon article! --User:CalicoCatLover September 13, 2010 18:10 (PST)

? This refers to questions I have about these two edits to the Chalcedon article: edit one, edit two. I'd swear the editor identified there is User:CalicoCatLover. --Lambiam 09:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flash crash cause[edit]

Labeling Waddell & Reed Financial's trade as the cause of the crash is like saying WW1 was caused by the assassination of Duke Ferdinand. The trade might have been a trigger, but the underlying cause (even according to the SEC's doc) is far more subtle and complex.

Besides, I think the SEC's document should also just be part of the "theories" section rather than elevating it in status by labeling it the "Identified Cause". There is sufficient evidence (look at how many times the SEC's report uses words like "should" and "could") that the report is just their attempt at a theory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.131.241.10 (talk) 19:24, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up about an RfC[edit]

Please note that there's a new discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure in which you may wish to comment. It is expected to close in about a week. You have received this message because you participated in a similar discussion (2009 AC2 RfC) last year. Roger ^talk 05:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rod Blagojevich is his birth name[edit]

If I read it correctly, you are the one that keeps changing Rod Blagojevich's name. He never had the name "Milorad" on any paperwork, such as his birth certificate. His name on his birth certificate is "Rod" & only "Rod". Why do you keep changing it back to Milorad. His father & the Serbian relatives always called him "Milorad". For more on this with specific citations, see Eric Zorn's Chicago Tribune blog item http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2010/08/milorad.html Please stop this foolishness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.237.191.32 (talk) 04:09, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You read it incorrectly. --Lambiam 14:48, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actus tragicus[edit]

Actus Tragicus is more common, you say, this is probably right, but it's wrong Latin, sharing this fate with Missa Brevis instead of Missa brevis, Dies Irae instead of Dies irae, to name just two of many. Should we call that kind of tragic? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:54, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of largest empires[edit]

Hi there. We're having a content dispute at the article above - the list of empires has a large 216 entries, and currently the article sees fit to repeat this list 6 times! Clearly a waste of storage and bandwidth. A better solution (saving at least 30% and making it much easier to read and use) would be a table with a column for each attribute, sortable, as used in many other articles (see the discussion). However, a silent editor keeps reverting attempts to clean up the article, without explanation. Please see the discussion (currently nobody disagrees). Your comments would be welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.207 (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your correction to Jacobian Matrices yesterday[edit]

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_integral which supports my edit yesterday. If you follow the section on spherical coordinates there, it shows that the Jacobian Determinant for spherical coordinates to Cartesian coordinates is - r² sin(φ). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.245.246.244 (talk) 23:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied at Talk:Jacobian matrix and determinant#Example?!. --Lambiam 08:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your correction to Fragaria[edit]

Hi, the multiplication sign in the names of plant hybrids should be adjacent to the epithet. Please see the code of nomenclature recommendation H.3A.1. "The multiplication sign in the name of a nothotaxon should be placed against the initial letter of the name or epithet. However, if the mathematical symbol is not available and the letter "x" is used instead, a single letter space may be left between it and the epithet if this helps to avoid ambiguity. The letter "x" should be in lower case." Nadiatalent (talk) 19:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was wrong! Somehow managed to pick up the old (St Louis) code of nomenclature instead of the latest (VIenna). I'll revert my reversions of your edits. Apologies once again! Nadiatalent (talk) 19:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. --Lambiam 19:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]