User talk:Matthew Matic

Welcome to the Wikipedia[edit]

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Wikipedia:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

[[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 12:10, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Lucy[edit]

I wonder if you'd be willing to merge Lucy, name into Lucy (disambiguation) and then put the former up for speedy deletion. There's not much to say about the name, and it seems a bit redundant to have a list of Lucys in both places. Gazpacho

I don't know if this is the correct place to reply but I've done as you suggest Matthew Mattic 09:22, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Test[edit]

You noted on my talk page that you recently logged in as 84.9.112.197 and found that I had posted a 'welcome, please don't test on a real article'-type message there. This was no doubt referring to edit, though I have no way of telling if you performed that edit or if someone else using that IP address did it. --Yamla 14:18, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bell test experiments[edit]

Hi Matthew

I see someone (205.211.199.216) has removed the reference you inserted in Bell test experiments to my "subtraction of accidentals" paper, though not (yet) all mention of it (the page still refers to Thompson:2003). Other people have been adding pathological "loopholes" that serve no purpose as far as I'm concerned -- I'm only interested in the ones that might occur in real experiments and that don't introduce new paradoxes. I suppose I'll have to tolerate these, but perhaps you could try putting back my ref -- perhaps this time with a URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9903066.

The prospects for a honest re-appraisal of the subject currently look bleak. As far as I know, all but one of the recent Bell tests have used tests that depend on the fair sampling assumption. I have, incidentally, come across one experiment that inadvertently illustrates the fact that decreasing detector efficiency really can increase the Bell test violation! See fig. 4b of S A Babichev et al, PRL 92, 193601 (2004). Caroline Thompson 10:42, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Travellers Lane[edit]

As it stands the article states that it's a road that goes from A to B and that there are shops and houses there. That describes just about every insignificant piece of tarmac in the world. I don't believe that it's Wikipedia's purpose to describe every single road in the world. I am therefore assuming that Travellers Lane is in some way a significant road due to either its commercial, logistic, historical or cultural importance. I am missing that imnformation from the article. It is also possible that the road is in fact INSIGNIFICANT. In that case an AFD listing would be called for. For examples see: Champs-Élysées, Fifth Avenue, Sunset Boulevard, M5 motorway, Bundesautobahn 1. Chelman 15:51, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speckled wood pic at Wicken Fen[edit]

Thanks for adding the picture to Wicken Fen. However it dosn't really seem relevant to the article. The butterfly is tiny and the Fen is not particularly noted for this common species, or indeed for woodland habitat. It's not clear if the picture was taken at the Fen although it looks as though perhaps it was. Have I missed something, or can you clarify what the picture is about? Naturenet | Talk 19:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in ...[edit]

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. I revised the pages at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in England. Please consider adding your name to the top of the page at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in London and to any of the other subpages for Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in England. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 01:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]