User talk:Kevin McE
Appearance
April 2006-March 2008 * Mar-Dec 2008 * 2009 * 2010 * 2011 * 2012 * 2013 * 2014 * 2015 * 2016 * 2017 * 2018 * 2019 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
so talk to me...
Happy New Year
[edit]Happy New Year !!! | ||
Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and aHappy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - MQS |
Wikiclaus Cheer !
[edit]Wikiclaus greetings | ||
|
The Signpost: 4 September 2024
[edit]- News and notes: WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked
- In the media: AI is not playing games anymore. Is Wikipedia ready?
- News from the WMF: Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election
- Wikimania: A month after Wikimania 2024
- Serendipity: What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year
- Traffic report: After the gold rush
The Signpost: 26 September 2024
[edit]- In the media: Courts order Wikipedia to give up names of editors, legal strain anticipated from "online safety laws"
- Community view: Indian courts order Wikipedia to take down name of crime victim, editors strive towards consensus
- Serendipity: A Wikipedian at the 2024 Paralympics
- Opinion: asilvering's RfA debriefing
- News and notes: Are you ready for admin elections?
- Recent research: Article-writing AI is less "prone to reasoning errors (or hallucinations)" than human Wikipedia editors
- Traffic report: Jump in the line, rock your body in time
The Signpost: 19 October 2024
[edit]- News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning
- Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper
- In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins!
- Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South
- Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night
- Book review: The Editors
- Humour: The Newspaper Editors
- Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug
The Signpost: 6 November 2024
[edit]- From the editors: Editing Wikipedia should not be a crime
- In the media: An old scrimmage, politics and purported libel
- Special report: Wikipedia editors face litigation, censorship
- Traffic report: Twisted tricks or tempting treats?
don't despair
[edit]Don’t despair 😉. 1983 suggests you know the exact date, but really, you only know that one of the kids was born so it's after her birth. I have nephews, one of whom has looked the same age for five years, and the other, despite being 18, still looks younger than Beau.
You should rather write 1985 so it doesn’t look like you know the exact date. That’s what I was taught in measurement labs.
Also note that most image cropped from this say as the original uploader said: 1980s Nux (talk) 22:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- If you do not understand that c stands for circa, meaning approximately, then, yes, I will despair. On what grounds would 1985 be less a claim of precision than c. 1983??? Kevin McE (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Well typically you round to 0, but also to 5 in some cases. Librarians on the other hand would typically write 198?. Circa 1983 means+/-1 and you just don't have that level of precision in this case. I was actually sure someone found almost exact date and I was wondering how. That's why I actually checked the history of the article. Nux (talk) 23:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- "Circa 1983 means+/-1" What???? Where on earth do you get that from? I cannot imagine that anyone thinks the younger child looks 8 1/2 or more, so it is totally fatuous to state that it is unspecified 1980s. Delete the date by all means, and let the reader guess for themselves, but don't treat them like idiots by pretending that they need to be told that she is younger than 9. Kevin McE (talk) 23:33, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oh come on, you don't have to be like that. Defensive and hostile I mean. I just shared my persoective. And 1980s doesn't have to mean the extreme of 1989... But I guess I can not convince you to my pov. Nux (talk) 00:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
- "Circa 1983 means+/-1" What???? Where on earth do you get that from? I cannot imagine that anyone thinks the younger child looks 8 1/2 or more, so it is totally fatuous to state that it is unspecified 1980s. Delete the date by all means, and let the reader guess for themselves, but don't treat them like idiots by pretending that they need to be told that she is younger than 9. Kevin McE (talk) 23:33, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Well typically you round to 0, but also to 5 in some cases. Librarians on the other hand would typically write 198?. Circa 1983 means+/-1 and you just don't have that level of precision in this case. I was actually sure someone found almost exact date and I was wondering how. That's why I actually checked the history of the article. Nux (talk) 23:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)