User talk:OutRIAAge

Welcome!

Hello, OutRIAAge, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! JoshuaZ 19:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you've been commenting on talk pages without having added your signature. You can do that by using ( ~~~~ ), four ~ characters in a row. That creates the user name / talk page / date stamp that you see everywhere on talk pages.

Good luck editing Wikipedia. Georgewilliamherbert 02:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Thunderbolt Patriot.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Thunderbolt Patriot.jpg has a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission, which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3). While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[1][2]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Thunderbolt Patriot.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 20:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With Basmati rice, you should really only use 1.25 to 1.5 the amount of liquid to rice. Other rices can take more water, but Basmati will mush up with too much :)

Tommr 19:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As much as I love seeing the quotations, they actually aren't appropriate content for the article. Some of the content can be thought of as objectionable as well the style of reference is inappropriate for an academic article. We might be able to think of a different way of incorporating them into the article, but as they are right now they seem inappropriate.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 06:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to write back to you actually and say it wasn't so much the quotes, but the certain ones that people might find offensive such as when Gostuv (I forget how to spell his name) talking about her legs and the continued comment. I think otherwise the quotes are fine actually looking at it again because it gives context to the humor of the show and those lines are some of the ones the show is well known for. I have actually used to quote (I don't recall it exactly now) "Please go off to the place called, done cooking."--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 02:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I'm not sure you're aware that that this article is currently subject to a featured article review - mostly on the grounds that it is not appropriately referenced. The text you're adding doesn't help in this regard, in fact, since it's not referenced actually hurts (the existing "Combining doors" section is one of the sections explicitly mentioned that is not referenced). Do you have a reference for this particular explanation, or is this simply the one you personally find most intuitive? If the former, please add the reference. If the latter, please understand that how you comprehend this problem is of no particular significance. Wikipedia's featured articles must exemplify the criteria at WP:FACR, which includes verifiability against reliable sources. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to explain. Not irrelevant is that I work in a certain Protocols Division (the same one that recently got fined $1.35 billion by the EU. That wasn't my particular fault - it was the poor, desperate, suicidal sod in the next cubicle :-), so I am fairly well-acquainted with the need to conform to strict, established standards and provide references.

The problem I have with your reversions is that I was adding to the section entitled "Aids to Understanding," which might reasonably be thought of as a looser section that explains the problem in clear, simple terms to laypeople who come to Wikipedia in hope that it will help them understand the world.

I was aware that I was duplicating the argument of the "Combining Doors" section. That section contains 236 words in 9 rather dense sentences that, to a casual reader, seem to be continuing the mathematical arguments given above. Noticing that it provided no references, I seriously considered replacing it with my 112 rather plain words in three sentences, and adding appropriate references to articles relevant to the “always switch” strategy, but thought that might be considered impolite.

I tested my wording with our local, annoying mathematician, using three Dixie cups and a nickel. He immediately clutched his head, then stole my Dixie cups (he also tried to get the nickel, but I’m Scottish :-)

So, advice please? Somewhat against my will, my job in life has become explaining things clearly to a given audience. The Wikipedia audience is … well, everyone, not just math geeks like myself and perhaps you. I think I did a good job of explaining the strategy clearly to anyone, without resorting to Bayesian analysis (good grief!).

I was happy to leave it in the “Aids to understanding” section, but would you have a problem if I instead deleted the entire “Combining Doors” section and replaced it with my three sentences, with appropriate references? (Even if you don't, I'm sure I'd hear from the people I'd just deleted.)

Thank you for your attention. OutRIAAge (talk) 06:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a good idea to add this text without a reliable source that shows the restated problem is equivalent to the original one (not just a source that says you should always switch). In response to the review I've been looking for sources for various sections of the article. I haven't really found anything I'd consider suitable (e.g. a book or an academic paper) for the "Combining doors" section. If you know of one, that'd be great. -- Rick Block (talk) 13:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but you're wrong - it's "But you never quite learned the song, she sang..." Not only do various sources confirm it - here, here, here, etc. etc. - it's also obvious from listening to the song itself. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:44, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, OutRIAAge. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]