User talk:Kwantus

Hi everyone,

The human behind this Wikipedia userid passed away suddenly on July 22nd, 2005. I am not sure what, if anything, is usually done in these situations, but I felt his passing worth noting here. --RobHutten 19:57, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

For more information on his passing, see Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians. --Alabamaboy 15:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Hello there Kwantus welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page or how to format them visit our manual of style. Experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump or my User Talk Page. --Lypheklub 16:31, 27 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

Hello Kwantus :) Did you know instead of using <var>n</var>, you can just as easily (and less typing), use ''n''? (Not apostrophes, two single ' s) It'll render just the same! Also, you don't need to line-break sentences when you write a wiki-article.

Nice work on Moser polygon notation :) Dysprosia 01:17, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

In reply to: (Dys, y'missed one; tho it's horrid practice to use emphasis for variables) -- It may be, but it's much harder to edit. It's Wikipedia standard practice anyway. If I'm not mistaken, they have same effect (I'm going to go try find out anyway :) Dysprosia 01:31, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

spiff. Wikipedia shoulda consulted the W³C first…dare i say something about XML woulda made lotta sense?

Hello, and welcome! I just wanted to thank you for helping out with AIDS reappraisal. That article is going to be a real monster to clean up; more level-headed editors are needed, regardless of their perspective on the issue. Also, I have to say I agree with you on the structure-versus-style markup - I use var for variables too, but it does get ugly to edit. Hopefully we'll have nice wiki-markup for those someday. I'm honestly very impressed with Wikipedia's general adherence to web standards practices - it's not perfect, but it's miles better than what you see almost everywhere else on the web. If you are interested in helping Wikipedia get a little closer to W3C-standards compliance, check out some of the related pages such as Wikipedia:How to use tables and Wikipedia:Alternate text for images. There is also a meta-page at m:Wikipedia accessibility for coming up with some good rules for accessible design, which unfortunately has languished as of late. Anyway, good to have you aboard! -- Wapcaplet 04:35, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

One that kinda bugs me is that WP eats <q> so i have to use &lsquo &rsquo &ldquo &rdquo ... but I'll admit M$IE ignores <q> and my own Konqi handles it all wrong. -- Kwantus

Ah, yes. I, too, long for the day when modern browsers are capable of fully implementing standards that are four (or more) years old. As for implementing additional HTML tags, I am fairly sure that is something that must be explicitly defined in the PHP code that manages Wikipedia; I don't imagine it would be too hard to implement them. Anything would be better than the informal standard we have now of using the colon ":" at the beginning of quotes, causing them to be formatted as definition data (without a definition term). A similar problem afflicts the usage of ":" to do indenting on talk pages and anywhere else, but there doesn't seem to be a good solution to it. We really could use a good Wiki-markup character for "quotation" though. I don't know what it could be. Maybe beginning a line with a hyphen? That doesn't seem to be used for anything else, aside from creating horizontal rules. Dunno. At any rate, I'd suggest avoiding using entity names (lsquo, rsquo, etc.) for quotation marks - they could easily confuse novice (or even experienced) editors, and many browsers seem to have difficulties with rendering them.

MSIE ignores a lot of things, in my experience. :-) I haven't tried Konqi (though I've used Konqueror, which isn't bad). You've probably heard it before, but Mozilla is really the only browser worth having (IMHO). -- Wapcaplet 05:43, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Konqi=Konqueror AFAIK. My actual favourite browser was Opera, I even paid for it. Having eschewed Winduhs, I've not used it for years =\--k

Opera is excellent too. I also paid for it, way back in version 3.21 or so, but lately it seems that it is getting bigger and clunkier; perhaps it's just not optimized so well for Linux (which is all I use these days), since it seems to take a while to load and run. It's not as streamlined as it once was :-) But you gotta give them credit, they really came out of nowhere and made a great browser. Unrelated, perhaps, but did you ever hear about the Opera Bork Edition? That was one of the most ingenious things I've ever seen! -- Wapcaplet 17:28, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I dun think I had. Hehee =) And then people think you're nutty when you talk about deliberate sabotage by M$ (see also DR-DOS). "That nice Bill Gates wouldn't do that."

WHy don't I use Mozilla? dunno. Not native-built for NetBSD? it tries to be everything? not integrated w/ KDE? bad memories of markup wars? not liking to use the same thing as everyone else and thus being subject to the same dangers? memory of the security hole in the JPEG code? stuff like that...-k

---

Re: John J. McCloy. Any chance you can write complete sentences and correctly wikify what you include in the article? This article is currently really worthless. RickK 07:48, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Simple answer, no. I research, not write. Don't like it, then fix it, erase it, or ban me, or any subset thereof...

Worthless? Not if, for example, someone were to visit the page hoping to find out information about John McCloy. Matthew Woodcraft

A problem I have in writing articles about people that connect to so much, like Hanfstaengl and McCloy, is what to put in their article and what to leave to other articles. So, McCloy release Thyssen and Krupp. Do i explin the significance of that in McCloy, or leave it to Thyssen and Krupp? Do I slap people over the face with the history -- leaving some looking for a minnow in a lake -- or put in only stuff that really belongs to THAT person? --k

For what it's worth, I don't think it's a big deal to have unfinished work lying around; incomplete sentences and undone wikification can always be fixed later, and it gives those who are new to Wikipedia some easy things they can tackle before working on writing new material. I am not one of those who believes that the article should be spit-shined before hitting "save page"; I think those who do believe such things are in the minority. So carry on; don't mind the detractors. IMHO, Wikipedia needs more researchers and fewer copy-editors. -- Wapcaplet 17:45, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

I don't think you need to work on articles at your userpage until they're "ready to publish". I think there's nothing unpublishable about any of your articles here. There are many worse articles already on Wikipedia. It also encourages involvement of others if you publish them on the main Wikipedia. I just posted your article. There is no urgent need to use complete sentences and such. You don't need to stay on math. LDan 18:42, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

umm... ya. But opposed to a set of facts which is in some sense complete at any stage, it can take quite awhile to sort out a piece of maths, and I don't think it's that's useful to put up something that's in NO sense finished. I'd've liked to have had at a nongibberish Alexander polynomial done before moving the page. I'm less likely to be falling over parallel edits... =p --k

Could you please write in sentences. This is an english language encyclopædia and its basic requirement is that its content be written in sentence format. Don't worry if you aren't sure of wikification rules or whatever. Others can do that. But some attempt at sentence structure is an elementary requirement. Others can clean it up if necessary but it is unfair to leave it exclusively to others to turn an article into a usable format, and it would be unfair to you if some people, finding lots of articles that weren't in some recognisable form, decided that they were then worthless and simply deleted them. Wiki is a team effort. Telling people 'I research, not write' is disrespectful to others and undermines your own credibility and the credibility of your contributions. lol FearÉIREANN 22:41, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

(The truth undermines credibility? Some people write better than study, and vice versa...) *sigh* I probably would have eventually made sentences, once i got key facts i felt substntiated collected ... but the whole thing blew up before i got to that stage. S'why i'm going to draft stuff in my own space from here on. --k (ugh. reminds me SO of usenet 20 years ago. "haha you mispelled a word! what a looser" =p)

---

You should take your request to Wikipedia:Votes for Deletion. I'd rather not be responsible for deleting you. RickK 20:57, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)

even this has to be an aggravation. fine. i'm just outta here. 'bye.

---

Kwantus, please do me a favor and tell me what you're trying to do with the fluorine article. Are you trying to alert readers to the dangers of fluoridation, or what?

Try to keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a forum for advocacy. Those of us who ARE advocates must especially keep this in mind, as we help to create articles which REPORT on controversies. See the section "writing for the enemy" in our NPOV article. --Uncle Ed 21:48, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I've explained this in a nutshell enough times already.

But I'll make a deal with ya. I'll summarise it again for ya, if you can make me understand why fluoride is added to water in the name of good health for the poor but vitamin C is not added to water in the name of good health for the poor...or any reason, anywhere, that I know of.

Fluoride is added to water that does not contain it naturally because it does not occur in food in sufficient quantity to provide good health, even if a well-balanced diet is consumed. It is the only nutrient essential in human nutrition for which this is the case, though iodide is close for people who don't eat fish.

Flaw: Fluorine is not an essential element (nor fluorides essential nutrients), for any biological process. It's a poison to most.

Vitamin C is not added to water because it is present in sufficient quantities in vegetables and citrus fruit that people who eat reasonably balanced meals get plenty of it.

Flaw: The poor can't afford good-quality, Vitamin-C rich food. It's because their food's poor that they're s'posed to need flourine, remember?

---

Hello. Your editing of Chebyshev polynomials prompts these two tips. ... Michael Hardy 22:47, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Ya, forgot the backsolidii. I often do =\ shan't happen again, since the less absurd I get the more abuse I suffer. The stomping of honest additions to Runge-Kutta methods and Taylor series by pointyhaired Tolkienheads whose numeracy is strained by football scores and listing of the royalty of Nincompoopia is the final very very last straw. I don't stomp his cr@p, yet I get the vandal labelling. WP's aiming for a comic book, not an encyclopedia, and I'm wasting no more effort on it. And I mean it this time. You won, RickK. 142.177.19.200 17:44, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC) (can hear the cheers all the way out in Nova Scotia)

---

I've listed your page American Idle on Wikipedia:Votes for Deletion. This topic does not merit a page of its own. It should be incorporated into American Idol, pop culture, or some article of that nature. -Smack 03:27, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Ken Blackwell

Salve, Kwantus!
Saw your query on the Talk:Ken Blackwell page. The article from the October 24, 2004 edition of the Plain Dealer linked here describes him as "honorary co-chairman", whatever the heck that means. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 22:33, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Image licencing

Hi you uploaded the following image Image:Venn-four.png, could you please attach a copyright tag see: Wikipedia:Image copyright tags, if its your own figure you may want to release it into the public domain of licence if with the GFDL, if you uploaded it from somewhere else please provide the source on the image page. Thanks --nixie 08:01, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

And could you tell me if Image:Heptomino-78.png is GFDL ? Thanks Tipiac 00:05, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also Image:Circle-n.png RedWolf 18:52, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Also Image:Circle-ten.png and Image:Circle-two.png RedWolf 18:57, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Image:Catshank.png, tagged as "unverified" since Feb 2004, now listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. -- Infrogmation 06:07, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

TALK Animals as food source

Yes, but were you responding to Airintake's 20th Dec question (in which case it is Wikipedia convention to indent) or starting another issue (in which case feel free to start another section). Simply continuing a bulleted list on one topic with a different issue leads to chaos. Quill 22:05, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

p.s. if both those comments were yours, please sign at the margin so we can tell, like this

Quill 22:07, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Please don't replace plain quotes with "smart quotes"

I noticed you just did so in Mount Washington Cog Railway. This is against Wikipedia standard style.

Image:Catshank.png

Greetings. There is currently no information on where Image:Catshank.png came from. Because of this, I'm listing it on Wikipedia:Image recreation requests. Your comments are welcome. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 16:19, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

Commas in LoPbN

In editing List of people by name: Chs-Chz you summarized

Jerzy, I left those commas out because they're incorrect!

In fact, they are not subject to grammar and thus neither correct nor incorrect. They are merely part of established format of these many pages in the LoPbN tree. IMO it would be more logical to have a single comma separate a name-and-date field from the rest (as you apparently prefer), but given the size of the tree (hundreds of pages), page-by-page change of format is not acceptable, even if breaking all existing software that parses on the assumption of the current format turns out to be.

If you're committed to this idea, raise it at Talk:List of people by name & give some idea of how getting the format changed thoroughly can be reasonably guaranteed (avoiding the risk of it being abandoned when half done).
--Jerzy (t) 04:02, 2005 Apr 11 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory vote

Please consider voting at:

Wikipedia:Conspiracy_theory

to rename articles that use the pejorative term "Conspiracy theory" to denigrate the content of the article.

Do the titles of WP articles generally pass partisan judgment on the subject under discussion? Should they? BrandonYusufToropov 02:22, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Mensural notation example

Thanks for creating a new, improved version of the mensural notation example on Note value.—Wahoofive (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Image:Weisskopf-charpentier-baerenreiter.png

Image deletion warning

The image Image:Weisskopf-charpentier-baerenreiter.png has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information.

Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 01:10, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

• Is this piece of image in the public domain? Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 09:01, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Hi! I've been going over some image copyright issues, and I'm having a hard time figuring out the copyright status of this image. I'm wondering if it would be possible to create a new image from a public domain source illustrating the point on note value? I appreciate your time on this matter. :) kmccoy (talk) 20:42, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

Template:WV Highways was started by some of in the state, and we have been working on it. A user from California has been pushing for it to be deleted. He wants it similar to California, WV is not CA. Can we get some support to keep from a fellow WVer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:WV_Highways

Thanks --71Demon 12:48, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Smith numbers

It is believed that about 3% of any million consecutive integers are Smith numbers.

Is this a heuristic estimate? Who first made this estimate? PrimeFan 15:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Bot problem

He is dead. Sorry. Either the image was old or somebody hacked into Kwantus' account. --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 06:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Is this any way to honor the dead? I'm horrified! --D-Day ^{My fan mail. Click to view my evil userboxes} 18:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

The image was uploaded in May, 2005. Kwantus's account does not appear to be compromised--this was just a standard no source deletion. Admrboltz didn't know the circumstances, obviously. Chick Bowen 05:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Comments from user page

I am adding comments from his user page here. Moe ε 22:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Rest in Peace

Rest in peace Kwantus. May you be well, wherever you are. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:23, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Wikipedians NEVER DIE…they just get reverted. Your edits will be written over, but your importance of your contribution shall never diminish. Thank you for making Wikipedia a part of your life. May God bless you and your family. Rama's Arrow 01:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sheepshank.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sheepshank.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 21:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Man-o'-war-sheepshank.png

File:Man-o'-war-sheepshank.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Man-o'-war-sheepshank.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Man-o'-war-sheepshank.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Knot-trefoil-left-64.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Knot-trefoil-left-64.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Papa November (talk) 11:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Knot-trefoil-right-64.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Knot-trefoil-right-64.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Papa November (talk) 11:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Knot-figure8-64.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Knot-figure8-64.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Papa November (talk) 11:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Pedal-curve-1.mng listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pedal-curve-1.mng, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Rest in Peace Chigalei hun dei (talk) 23:48, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Rest in Peace

Rest in Peace, I may not have known you but thank you for being a great person and a great editor. Joey (talk) 01:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)