Archives

/Archive /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6

You all know the drill, empty talk pages scare me, say something intelligent! InedibleHulk (talk) 06:42, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow that was quick, I guess poutine isn't your thing?

Arbitrary line break because you asked for it. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 06:43, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Poutine is totally my Canadian thing. That's why I wolfed it, thanks again! Feel free to grab a beer and watch the last period, bud. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the last period is fine, but from a southern neighbor of yours, I prefer a different Canadian sport, so I'll get much more excitement from a final "end". Either way, you seem nice, i may even stick around. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 07:54, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You sure you're not already following me? Either way, yeah, curling's fine. Especially with vodka! InedibleHulk (talk) 08:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have actually curled with vodka one time. My teammates claim it made them better players. Me?, I lost that game so badly that the other team went literally off the scoreboard, and I got 0 points,,, so. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 09:04, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet. I've only "really" tried it on beer and weed, but I had to respond to Martin's (atypically) lame pun somehow, and didn't want to laugh or seem rude. On that note, the important thing is we all had fun and we all go home, points are just gravy. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:32, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Poutine? "For many years it was perceived negatively and mocked, and even used by some to stigmatize Russian society."? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hobbles off, stage left... Martinevans123 (talk) 09:40, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not you, it's your audience. Over here, It's All Been Done. But that last one was immediately redeeming, you'll win the room back yet, matter of time is all. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All been done? You know my high standards! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:24, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That one's over my head, so presumably genius, welcome back! InedibleHulk (talk) 00:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I really wouldn't count on it. IAmNotChaos, justabitdisorganised (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, (Get A) Grip (On Yourself)! InedibleHulk (talk) 08:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it's ok with you, I'll just shut up and dance: [1] Martinevans123 (talk) 09:42, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah - that's interesting. Is the use of -ize verus -ise creating concern in some places because of Russia's use of Z as a fascist-like symbol? I'm in Canada, where the -ize is the only one used. Which is interesting, as we use British spelling most of the time. So it's colorization in the USA, colourisation in the UK, and colourization in Canada! Nfitz (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it has anything to do with Russia, that's newz to me. I think it just gives us away as ignorant foreigners. What pisses me off is how the Loyalist provinces put the day before the month; go back to yer motherlands, eh? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:51, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on - I thought Northern Ireland was the Loyalist province! :)

Also, in looking at your recent edits (trying to figure out my reversion confusion), I noticed Canadian white bread. Fascinating! I had no idea there was such a thing. Perhaps explaining why Wonderbread in the USA is so lacking substance - kind of like an Ontario bagel. Though perhaps there needs to be clarity at the beginning that this is a USA product - I was half-way through before I realized that!

At least it makes more sense than Canadian bacon - which has no resemblance to back bacon (which is more likely to be called peameal bacon by most here). Americans told me it was back-bacon ... first time I ordered it, I was shocked ... looked like a highly-processed between fake ham and baloney - with a rather disturbing skin. Nfitz (talk) 20:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's peameal bacon and plain white bread. Anyone who tries to tell you differently is a manipulative bastard or a fool! I don't eat either these past couple of decades, though, so I can't get too upset. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually almost the sharpest photograph in human history (microwaveograph?). The resolution's an astoundingly small 3,000 Earth diameters which is equivalent to 0.01 millimeter resolution from 68.8 kilometers away. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:58, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fair point. In the grand scheme of things, it's not a meaningless anuslike smudge, it's an accomplishment. But this computer is no supercomputer by far, and what small portion of gradient fits on screen is still massively taxing, so I've reshrunk it to boxsized and added two words to your caption. Thanks for sharing! Enjoying that lunar eclipse tomorrow? InedibleHulk (talk) 17:33, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Mr. Shadow is only a few thousand Earths wide anyway so even 20x20 pixels would have most of the information of the one in 17 million pixel Ultra HD. The wavelength was about 2,000 times bigger than red light so the telescope had to be the size of the Earth. To see how fun this aperture synthesis would be if it worked on dogs see this cartoon. Beret Guy's doing it wrong though, you need more than two telescopes for a 2-D image. This anus pic took FIVE YEARS to calculate! Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:06, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm going to need a rotation or two before that cartoon makes sense. I'm sure it is pretty fun, eventually. I'm glad you get it for now! InedibleHulk (talk) 21:22, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They synthesize a virtual Earth-sized radio dish with some tiny (up to 50 meters) real ones. But the synthesized dish is hidden by a virtual perforated lens cap that hides the c. 99.99999999% of the virtual dish that isn't a legit submillimeter astronomy dish. If the virtual dish with holed lens cap was real it wouldn't see as sharp as the pic like you'd think cause the laws of physics suck but they figure out the pic with knowledge of how light waves add and subtract, 5,000 CPU-years of number crunching and I think they need knowledge of the dishes' latitude, longitude and altitude to very sub-wavelength accuracy (≤0.3mm probably). Also the Antarctic dish, African dish, Hawaiian ones, Chilean ones and N. American ones need atomic maser clocks so that trial-and-error becomes good enough to find out which microwave is which many months later when they fly the massive amount of hard drive data to the supercomputer (there's 230,000,000,000 microwaves per second). Maybe the exposure times have to be 1/1,000,000,000,000th of a second or less too, it sure seems like it to me if they're interfering single waves. Eyeball astronomy's so much easier, the mirror just has to be satellite dish-shaped to <0.0001 millimeter accuracy regardless of size and as little as 116 mm wide for near laws of physics-limited sharpness. Some amateurs even make the scope themselves with low tech, a handful of pages of know-how and no power tools — and they save money!. It seems impossible but it's like "buy a shit telescopemaking-only mirror straight from a glass mold, rub the right spot right with the right (very small-grain) abrasive, look at it through 1800s physics tricks, learn where to rub next from what distorted pattern you see, repeat, use progressively smaller grains, deposit barely non-translucent layer of metal when the pattern's good" (when they check mirror curvature to <0.0001 mm a knife-edge test is involved somehow, I think that's the one that shows stripe(s), there's a similar test for aligning the optical train so the view's not shit, around the turn of the century they started selling affordable amateur telescope aligning lasers, they'd fit the standard 1.25 or 2-inch wide tunnels that eyepieces look through and shoot a laser off the small periscope mirror then big then small again and if the laser didn't hit the small hole in the laser aligner you'd turn mirror screw(s) till it did) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hai. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Technical assistance" is a thing, not assistance that's technical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsryanjr (talk • contribs) 03:09, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's assistance with technical things. But any reason is better than no reason. Go ahead if you want. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you have offered an opinion but haven't "voted". 48Pills (talk) 16:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it's "official". What a system! I nominate you, 48Pills, to field any follow-up nonsense. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Like this? 48Pills (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I need some help with Davide_King, he's just not going to let it go. 48Pills (talk) 19:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

48Pills, this is a WP:PERSONAL ATTACK. See also WP:CANVASSING. Davide King (talk) 19:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Davide King This is a private conversation and you're not welcome. 48Pills (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone's welcome here and most of us seem like twats to someone, sometimes. Anyway, I'm not tagging in, that whole article's on fire. May the coolest heads prevail! InedibleHulk (talk) 01:49, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

48Pills (talk) 10:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi InedibleHulk,

Given that I'm quite new to Wikipedia and have interacted with you on ITN, I wanted to ask you for some assistance relating to the Current Events Portal. As there does not seem to be any talk pages for each date of the Current Events, where would a discussion for the disputed content be held? I noticed that there was a noticeboard for the portal, but it seems that the portal is rarely used. Carter00000 (talk) 11:14, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any better place than that board, except maybe one of the content disputers' talk pages. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:21, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, thank you for your information. I will try to discuss on the users Talk Page.Carter00000 (talk) 11:24, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck, rookie. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:28, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, amazing! 100,000 edits is extremely impressive 👍🏼. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 09:24, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, until you realize how many of those were used to fix my own minor errors, anyway. Slight misindentation alone probably accounts for hundreds. Meanwhile, a hundred thousand or more other editors used the same time to tend to their health, careers and relationships; they're the real heroes, I must impress! InedibleHulk (talk) 19:34, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a friendly note that in my view and I think, the majority of editors, Chris Cilizza's column "The Point" in CNN is an opinion source, so it wouldn't be usable for a description of Trump's politics. Most of the content on CNN is very reliable but Cilizza is a notable exception due to lower quality of content, lack of oversight, and tendency to report opinion as analysis. If Cilizza could come in, that would open the door to many op-eds that call Trump much worse stuff that folks have already objected to. Andrevan@ 20:22, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He's just another example. The other two assholes, too. Any guy or gal on the Internet, same deal, whether they think he's a heel, a far-right politician, a conspiracy theorist, an insurgent, a reptilian, a racist, the rightful president or an idiot. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:34, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, reliable sources with editorial boards and rules for fact-checking and stuff, are better than random blogs or op-eds from otherwise reliable outlets. This is RS 101. Andrevan@ 20:37, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you two others, as a favour, because you asked. I'm not the one looking to put an entirely different opinion into Wikivoice in a living person's lead. Accept my point for what it is or kindly move on. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:42, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you for the sources. Andrevan@ 20:48, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As a really-not-really overconcussed Perry Saturn once famously repeated, you're welcome. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:56, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Sideswipe9th (talk) 00:51, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]