User talk:Wernher/Archive 2

Airlistbox

Re summary: Thanks! I skipped that in the interest of time, and, I have a tendancy not to bother with the summary. Sorry if you got a huge amount of hits in your watchlist. Also, perhaps aircraft weapons should be changed to air weapon, so it can go on more missle pages. Alternatively a second box could be made more with a rocket/space focus? Nice articles on these missle btw! --Greyengine5 20:36, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

We'll have to try and decide how to do this wrt a second type of box for missiles; I have a special interest in those. Maybe a subtype within the aircraft box would be the thing? I also consider becoming a member of the Aircraft WikiProject -- is there a procedure for this, or do I just include myself on the project page? --Wernher 17:01, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You just add yourself to the list, its all very informal. Mostly its just forum on new standards, with people following the decided upon 'suggestions' to varying levels. For missle inclusion, perhaps both can be done. Change aicraft weapon to air weapons, and also develop a new footer more centric to them? The tricky part I guess is a lot of missiles aren't aircraft weapons, so mabybe just link to Missile as well or perhaps 'rockets'? Look forward to any more ideas! Greyengine5 01:44, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

In view of what you mention here, I think a separate Missile box modeled on your Aircraft box would do (I'm now talking of the box of characteristics on the right hand side, not the airlistbox below). I'm sure we'll fix it somehow. I'll try to make the information on missiles more complete and encyclopedic in prose eventually, as time permits. --Wernher 12:21, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Slight revert mishap

I think we just stepped on each other reverting some vandalism on the comparative military ranks page. In the process, I think I deleted your new comment. Rather than keep stepping on each other, can I ask you to add your comment back? Thanks. Rossami 14:21, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I just did, I hope (reinserted the note). No big problem, after all it's good to see that there are several people on the alert when those lousy vandals "strike". :-) --Wernher 14:37, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Austrian election

Any plans to write the non-existent article you just linked to on the Austrian presidential election, 2004? Consider commenting in talk:Current events#Election results... --67.100.122.101 22:14, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Heh - it seems someone has picked up the relay token already. In other words: Wikipedia works! :-) Will check out the Talk page to see if I might contribute something there. --Wernher 23:37, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Speaking Norwegian

Jeg snakker ikke norsk :-) But I try to learn it, bit-by-bit and I have a very special language-feeling (which I can't really explain), so I can "understand" some words. And as you said: Norwegian is not that far apart from Dutch... But why don't you write on the Norwegian Wikipedia? - Puckly 22:52, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

And neither do I speak Dutch, but I share this special language-feeling with you, it seems, which for my part expresses itself in that I tend to be able to guess with more than a 50-50 'hit-rate' the meaning of words in miscellanous Latin/German-family languages. I write/edit articles mainly in the English wikipedia for two reasons: 1) I like to think that most of the subjects I cultivate is of a 'general' not-only-Norwegian interest, so I want the largest possible number of people to be able to read and peer-review my writings, and 2) quite simply because I enjoy sharpening my English skills. Wernher

It's exactly that: I find it easy to "guess" or "understand" languages I've never learned at school... :-) Puckly

But I'm a little intrigued by your answer: if you don't speak/read/write Norwegian, how come your -"no:" edits? --Wernher 23:59, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I sometimes visit the Norsk Wiki and when new articles have been added, I like to add the interwiki-links at the English and Dutch (and sometimes German, Polish, French wiki's). Maybe it's because I hope Wikipedia is a success in all countries and people like you see such an add, go and have a look and add some more to that new article... :-) Puckly 00:16, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

IBM 8100

Are you sure this is microprocessor based? It was introduced in 1978. -- RTC 07:35, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Nope, not sure at all, so moving it to the previous category was probably the best. --Wernher 10:42, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Data General Business Basic

Thanks for your improvments to this article. Can I assume that you were once a DGBB user (and maybe a B32 user?) or does this flow from your interest in BASIC in general? --Gadfium 22:04, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Your latter guess is the correct one. I have kind of a hobby comparing different BASIC implementations (though mostly on microcomputers), and I also have an interest in Data General (from reading The Soul of a New Machine, among other things). --Wernher 10:46, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

{{msg:Acorn_Computers}}

Putting that in was probably the best solution, and you got there before I did. Thanks :) --Kim Bruning 10:00, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

And thank you for noticing, and being positive about it. Just a little step on my 'Acorn-Awareness Quest'. :) --Wernher 10:50, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Quisling and PM

There seem to be a new guy hell-bent on putting Quisling in the list of Norwegian PMs. Would appreciate if you contributed. I really don't have time for an edit-war, so I hope you do :P --Bjorn H Bergtun 05:05, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Brimstone

Thanks for adding my Brimstone article to DYK section - glad you liked it! Mark 18:02, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I absolutely do like articles on missiles etc, it being one of my hobbies to keep track of development in that area of military tech. I work in the industry myself. Regarding the DYK entry, I must admit that what I actually did was some 'pop-up caption' editing after the article had been added -- which someone did ahead of my contribution. But thanks anyway! :-) --Wernher 19:45, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC) --these days in the middle of reading the book I put in as a reference in the V1 flying bomb & V2 rocket articles; a brilliant and detailed account

Re Summaries

I do usually make a summary, just look at my contributions. Typically, if I don't put one, it's because I hit alt-S before populating the field, without realizing it. Thanks for the note, though, would be useful to newbies who don't notice the summary field. --Golbez 16:26, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for replying! It is a somewhat sensitive issue, and by simply sending the note to users who haven't submitted a summary of their edit appearing at some random point in time on my watchlist, I risk notifying people who, like you, usually do make a summary. From now on I'll check user contributions before sending the note. :-) --Wernher 16:50, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

External links

Hi, you moved an reference external link in Hello world program to the bottom to the External links section. Did you do it just on impulse or is there a policy that says not to have ext. links inside paragraphs ? Jay 07:59, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes, putting ext lks in the ==External links== section is encouraged by wikipedia policy; see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Position in article. Part of the motivation might be to clearly identify ext lk references for users taking printouts of an article. Casual users in particular, I guess, might not see what a [<number>] in the middle of the article text means. --Wernher 16:54, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

hmm.. I used to liberally use inline external links, and I thought they were very helpful if the ext. link didn't have much to do with the article in question, but only is a reference to what was mentioned in a line or para in that article. The policy line says "This is discouraged in most situations." I wonder what situations they are encouraged, maybe the ext. link I added in Hello World Program was an "encouraging" one ! Jay 17:06, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Since no response from you, I'll be reverting your changes reg. ext. links. Also I'll be adding a line or two in the Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Position in article page. Jay 10:48, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Right'O, I guess it's OK then. Any further discussion will probably (as it should) take place in the Manual of Style. Thanks for notifying me, particularly re. the rationale for your actions. --Wernher 17:36, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"You can not sell the files"

We can't guarantee what downstream forks of Wikipedia will do. This is not an acceptable GFDL release. RickK 21:58, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. The site I got SWTPC's logo from (FYI: SWTPC does not exist anymore) consists mainly of scans of old product brochures etc. However, I do of course realize that the person scanning the stuff and putting it on his website may not want others to do what they want with the scans. I only uploaded the logo, though, which surely must be fair use, considering that logos of existing companies/corporations are no problem wrt this. Should I change the img info text to "fair use"? --Wernher 22:36, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't know what the procedures are. You might want to discuss it on the ifd page. RickK 22:45, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)

Done. I also updated the img info txt. --Wernher 23:13, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for deletion

See my reply to you about computer hardware companies. - UtherSRG 05:09, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for doing the work (I've done such work for other categories myself)! I have now delisted the {{cfd}} entry. BTW, I discovered the change yesterday, so I have actually added several companies already. :-) --Wernher 17:05, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Linotype

Did you mean to include Linotype in (Category:Computer printers)? I would be stunned to learn that there was ever a computer that used hot-type printout! - DavidWBrooks 18:34, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

IIRC, a computerized Linotype system was mentioned in Leslie Lamport's book on LaTeX -- but I may of course be gravely mistaken, i.e. Lamport may have been referring to something else... I'll try to sort it out (feel free to help if you have the time). --Wernher 01:10, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

FORTRAN vs Fortran

I've noticed that the Fortran page says its name is Fortran. I'm not an expert in computer history, but some of your recent edits might be incorrect. --Yath 03:58, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, you're absolutely right. I just read the opening paragraph of the article. Much too quick on the keyboard and 'Save page' button, I'm afraid! :-) I've reverted the edits now, and added a note in the article source (please inspect). --Wernher 04:01, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)