User talk:Modest Genius
If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages by four tildes, like this: ~~~~
Attention: We, Wikipedians, dislike fragmented discussions. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page, my talk page, as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.
Thank you!
 Archives |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
ITN for Southern Sudanese independence referendum, 2011
 |
On 9 January 2011, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Southern Sudanese independence referendum, 2011, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page. |
Barnstar
 |
The Original Barnstar | |
| This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation. |
Thanks
Thanks for tagging dead links in James E. Boyd (scientist). I took care of them right away :) Disavian (talk) 21:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- I thought you'd find them; I was just learning how to use Checklinks! Modest Genius talk 13:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Bad Grammer!!!!!
I have come to notice that their is some bad grammar on you're user page. THe 4th box down on the right hand side has the terrible sentence "This user has many much edits" this was most distressing to me and my children who will know not sleep tonight for fear of the the bad grammer monster comeing to consume there souls. please if you can rectify this asap. 128.243.253.104 (talk) 17:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)theredrectangle
- That's a deliberate in joke. I find it rather suspicious that you're posting from a Uni Nottingham IP address using the tag 'theredrectangle', and somewhat ironic that you would complain about it using very poor English yourself... Modest Genius talk 20:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Plasma cosmology
Hi Modest Genius, you've removed some wikilinks I'd written. They linked to plasma cosmology and were all in the "see also" section of the pages. You gave as your reason that the links were "not relevant". Since plasma cosmology has an alternative take on the articles in question the links were clearly relevant - the plasma cosmology page discusses things in all the articles linked to. Also, since plasma cosmology is not mainstream I specifically avoided putting the links in the main body of the articles and only in the "see also" section. I think the links are relevant and in the appropriate section and I can't see any reason not to have them. What do you think? Aarghdvaark (talk) 09:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see any value in adding a link to a fringe theory on pages which are otherwise utterly unrelated to the subject. Flat earth cosmology has a different interpretation of the planets, but that doesn't mean it should be in the see also section of all the article on planets. Modest Genius talk 20:33, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
- I take it your reason for removing the links is therefore that plasma cosmology is a fringe theory, not that the links are not relevant? Could you explain why you think it is a fringe theory. Actually I would expect to see a link of some sort to the idea of a flat Earth on a page about the shape of the Earth, and indeed you can see Flat Earth on the page Spherical Earth! Cheers Aarghdvaark (talk) 01:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
- Both: a) It's not relevant to topics like radio galaxy, which has absolutely nothing to do with plasma cosmology, but would be relevant on pages like non-standard cosmology or indeed cosmology. Both already link to it. b) It's a fringe theory, with essentially zero support among professional astronomers (as the article itself notes). It therefore has no place on articles discussing astronomy as it is currently understood. Both of those make the link inappropriate for the pages I removed it from. Modest Genius talk 14:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
- There's some further discussion of this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Astronomy#Plasma_cosmology_linking. Modest Genius talk 16:51, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
- Both: a) It's not relevant to topics like radio galaxy, which has absolutely nothing to do with plasma cosmology, but would be relevant on pages like non-standard cosmology or indeed cosmology. Both already link to it. b) It's a fringe theory, with essentially zero support among professional astronomers (as the article itself notes). It therefore has no place on articles discussing astronomy as it is currently understood. Both of those make the link inappropriate for the pages I removed it from. Modest Genius talk 14:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
- I take it your reason for removing the links is therefore that plasma cosmology is a fringe theory, not that the links are not relevant? Could you explain why you think it is a fringe theory. Actually I would expect to see a link of some sort to the idea of a flat Earth on a page about the shape of the Earth, and indeed you can see Flat Earth on the page Spherical Earth! Cheers Aarghdvaark (talk) 01:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Shall we AGF?
Modest Genius, I hope you're available to promptly address the comments I've added to your recent actions on my OTD error query. Perhaps you would go on to apply your scrutiny fairly and in good faith to all pages you deem inadequate... or perhaps just the one I helpfully mention, since you evidently want to keep inadequate articles off the On this day - Selected Anniversaries section of the Main Page. Thank you, Deborahjay (talk) 12:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- I have replied on WP:ERRORS. But I think you should refrain from making assumptions about other users motivations. Modest Genius talk 15:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
