User talk:HopsonRoad/Archive 9

thanks for the welcome but unnecessary ...

Been banging on grammar for a while, thanks, I know the tildes are not necessary but I like them :) As a non-Spanish speaker, how often does one get to use them ? :) 203.160.86.121 (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!

Very nice work cleaning up after me! J S Ayer (talk) 21:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Anthroposophy

Thank you for your message about my contribution. I have already registered myself but at my advanced age have I got tired of keeping track and retrieving passwords and such on occasions when it is not so important. 90.228.221.245 (talk) 20:54, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Winter storm

Hi there, I'm always happy to discuss photos for articles. In this case, I don't think the Dallas image is appropriate for the article for several reasons. As horrible the snow is to people living in Texas, the article should reflect 'Winter storm' more globally. Recent events always trigger lots of image uploads in articles and these are usually not so well thought through. Dallas got 1/2 inch of snow with winds around 9 mph (14 km/h) (=Gentle breeze). It is a cold wave, an unusual occurrence or abnormal weather, but meteorologically it's not a snow storm. Media har a tendency to go for drama when naming weather phenomena. The article also has photos only from the US so at least one photo from another part of the world would be better.

Might I suggest the photo be replaced by either File:Nevicata eccezionale (4433552880).jpg from Italy, File:Sneeuw Kruiskamp 's-Hertogenbosch.jpg from The Netherlands or File:RFA Tidespring during bad weather off the UK coast MOD 45163864.jpg taken south of Plymouth. The photo from the English Channel is also nice since it illustrates a winter storm at sea while all the other images are land-based. cart-Talk 11:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for writing, W. Carter. I understand, appreciate and tend to agree with what you have mentioned here. However, this discussion belongs at Talk:Winter storm, where other editors can express their opinions, as well. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 20:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Fish scales

I'm a nordic journalist in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, and I don't have any primary sources, but I can tell you that you can call any nordic shop in the world and ask for fish scale skis and they'll know exactly what you're talking about.

This isn't exactly a well documented thing, it's largely tied to the nordic skiing cultural scene. Just google nordic fishscales and you'll see hundreds or thousands of results.

Feel free to put it wherever you like, but it should be SOMEWHERE in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.167.32.225 (talk) 22:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

For example, Salomon is one of the largest nordic ski producers in the world, and on their website, they refer to them FIRST as fishscales, and second as waxless. Nowhere are they called 'textured'. https://www.salomon.com/en-us/nordic/nordic-advice/how-choose-classic-cross-country-skis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.167.32.225 (talk) 22:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Meteors

It is poorly understood by the general public that meteors/fireballs first become visible when they are about 100 km above sea level. The public often thinks they are visible at 10,000 km. This should be covered in the lead and not buried in the article. -- Kheider (talk) 15:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I concur, Kheider, however this discussion belongs at Talk:Meteoroid, where I'll copy it. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 15:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

LC-130

You removed an edit I made this afternoon (I wasn’t logged in at the time) from the LC-130 page. The plane is there, it is visible in satellite images of the airport, and I can send you a picture of it taken this afternoon if needed. It’s the only LC-130 on display and I’d like to get that info back on the page. Atd413 (talk) 04:10, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Atd413, and thank you for your interest in this topic. I am very sympathetic to your edit. However, unfortunately there is no WP:RELIABLE on which to base it. If you live nearby, taking a picture of the aircraft would be a good way to include it in the article. BTW, the Pima Air & Space Museum has a ski-equipped C-130D on display. This could be mentioned in the article. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 16:08, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

I have pictures from yesterday. So if pictures are added can the “aircraft on display” section be restored? That’s one of the first things I look for on most aircraft pages and it has proven very helpful. Also I have been to the Pima museum and don’t recall seeing a ski equipped C-130, it may be a recent addition or it may be stored at the boneyard adjacent to the museum at Davis Monthan AFB. I’m not sure if that info would belong on a page specific to the LC-130 or not. Atd413 (talk) 22:18, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

See Talk:Lockheed LC-130#LC-130 for continuation of discussion. HopsonRoad (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit war at 2016 United States presidential election in Vermont

Hey, HopsonRoad! I just wanted to make sure you're aware that the three-revert rule also most likely applies to you in this case, so if Matthew McMullin breaks the rule, the safest option is probably to create a report at WP:AN/EW rather than reverting again and breaking the rule yourself. Have a great day! Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 00:41, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Bsoyka I am aware. It appears that I have only one revert in the past 24 hours and you have one perhaps just outside the 24 hours. Since McMullin has been blocked, for warring are we not free to restore the article to its pre-war condition? Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 02:18, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I see that you did! Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 02:20, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Wind-powered vehicle

Thank You very much for greatly improving my awkward and cumbersome language. I must admit that I always lacked style even in Russian, let alone in English. Nethertheless, I intend to make some (hopefully, minor) tweaks to the text to improve precision and to eschew ambiguity. Эйхер (talk) 18:06, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Очень хорошо, Эйхер, и спасибо! Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 18:28, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Froude Edit - Account Created

I've done as you recommend, thought I might as well get round to it so I can collect my edit history (many different IPs previously)

TheTacticalPanda (talk) 21:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Bankset

https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/bankset-kommt-der-sonnenstrom-der-zukunft-vom-bahngleis-a-b1d5885c-0002-0001-0000-000178959727 https://www.sonnenseite.com/en/energy/bankset-energy-announces-gw-scale-plans-for-solar-railways-the-world-over/ https://masstransit.network/mass-transit-news/smartrail-world/solar-panel-tracks-could-support-worlds-future-energy-demands

Q: The above jumble of web links (now in the collapsed box) is not the slightest bit helpful. Please state what you feel should be in the article and provide one or two sources that support it that qualify as a reliable source. HopsonRoad (talk) 22:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

A: here you have two sources to proceed with the article also from spiegel the largest publication mag in europe

Bankset is a financial and energy group investment company founded by Patrick Buri in 1996 in New York city. The company is engagement in a number of investments and recently developed the Bankset sun solar system on rails way with Deutsche Bahn, taking advantage of the rails network, solar panels are deployed over long distances. The billion euro company Bankset wants to pave The Deutsche Bahn rail network with solar modules and feed it directly into the overhead lines. Bankset installed the first solar panels on the rails network in 2015 in Switzerland and created the new market. photos available on the internet ?

--82.60.185.241 (talk) 14:45, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Q:Thank you for supplying reliable sources regarding using solar collection in railway beds. However, they are not germane to this article on smart highways. Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 15:31, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

A: thank you for the message indeed its not totally sutable to this smart highways page ! its a totally new concept covered in various medias looking at a new page probably, i am not sure what you mean here exactly ? " do you have time for a new page around solar rails on the rail way or bankset? we see more and more media and reports for this fabulous revolutionary system. best regards --82.60.185.241 (talk) 02:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC) --Lichtsun (talk) 02:45, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

hi , here created the off line article , looking forward to your expertise and edit some more please ? its a fascinating concept and idea and many reliable sources , great inventions a revolutionary system according to the spiegel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bankset

--Lichtsun (talk) 08:25, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

-- hi hope your well and return soon, please look here we are looking for a third opinion and help for the edits and grammar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hobbitschuster#solar_on_rails_way --Lichtsun (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

How do you change a template

I'm trying to check the criteria for the Cold Front article to get it up to B quality but I can't edit the template, so I can't say yes or no. How do you edit a template? Also, I have Grammarly which tries to fix other peoples comments, sorry(: Crosstan (talk) 15:03, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm doing homework

I'm doing a science assignment so please don't text me until I say I'm done.D:Crosstan (talk) 18:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I finished my assignment so you can talk to me now.(:Crosstan (talk) 16:57, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks from Lawrence of Italia

Dear HopsonRoad, thank you for canceling my Wikipedia Italianization changes. You have given me a great lesson. I don't know what came over me that day. You see, I'm Italian and I love my country more than anything else, and perhaps, taken by a raptus, it occurred to me to Italianize Wikipedia, without knowing the rules and regulations of the site. Now that I have learned my lesson, I will never do such a thing again. I hope it can be forgiven. Thanks, Lawrence of Italia

Marcel de Kerviler

Do you know enough French to say if Marcel de Kerviler being said in that source to have been an "adminral" is at all like an English speaker is thinking, in that they are a high ranking military official. I believe that the soldier notability has been deprecated, so even if he was at the level of the term in English as used in the US and Britain (and I assume other English speaking countries, I am not a deep expert on the military, especially not for India (which has English as an official language), Kenya, Ghana, Nigeria or Zimbabwe (OK, Zimbabwe probably does not have a navy). So even if he is at that level, we would neee way better sources than have been shown to justify keeping the article. Also with the conflict as to birth year I am a little afraid we are about to build the Frankenstein. More likely though this is a sign that the sports database used as the only source in the article is not as reliable as some think. I mentioned this discussion and the conflict of information at Wikipedia talk:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

John Pack Lambert, French Wikipedia describes an amiral as "un officier général de rang élevé dans la plupart des marines militaires" (a general officer of elevated rank in the navy). There have been many admirals in many navies, few worthy of a Wikipedia article! HopsonRoad (talk) 17:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

question re category name

Hi. your suggestion regarding the category, i.e. So, I propose to rename this category Category:Nazi-era German officials who resisted the Holocaust and will enter it as a WP:CFD in about 24 hours, unless I hear serious objection. The CFD will officially establish whether there is a consensus on this. sounds totally fine to me. would it be ok with you if we simply went ahead and implemented that, rather than bringing this to CFD for approval? I think we have a pretty good consensus here, based upon your efforts. I hope that's ok. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Square rig

I don't know if you have an opportunity to look at Square rig. There seems to be an attempt to include Austronesian content which is based on very tenuous interpretations of the literature. At best, if there was a fully complete Square rig article (as opposed to the current poor quality offering), one might just be able to squeeze in a sentence on the Austronesian situation, but (a) I would resist even that (b) the rest of Square rig would need a lot more content for that sentence not to disturb the balance of the article. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the alert, ThoughtIdRetired. I've been away for two weeks and am about to leave for 10 days, but I concur with your observations. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 19:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Noted about your two absences, but thanks for your interest. I am currently becoming a micro-expert (is that a word?) on Pacific and south-east Asian traditional sailing technology. It seems to be a rapidly developing subject. I have eventually resorted to contacting the authors of some of the academic papers on the subject directly and have just finished reading a paper I was recommended to by Peter Lape, a Professor of Anthropology at the University of Washington. The recommended paper is a review article (useful for a Wikipedia editor as this makes it a secondary source) titled Changing perspectives upon Māori colonisation voyaging by Atholl Anderson of the Australian National University. I also have been given (I believe) the contact details for an expert on recreating replicas/interpretations of ancient craft - so if the e-mail address works I hope to be pointed to more appropriate sources.

As I progress into the subject, it occurs to me that if the entire universe of sails is made up of two all-encompassing classifications, being "fore and aft rig" and "square rig", then this terminology is unbalanced. There are lots of sub-categories to "fore and aft rig" (gaff rig, Bermuda rig, lug, etc.), but square rig has no comparable subcategories. Hence inclusion of all sorts of "downwind" sails as square sails/square rig destroys any specific definition for the rig we all think of as square rig. I am tempted to throw the phrase "cultural appropriation" into the argument, even though I am sure it would be wise not to. Incidentally, I don't know if you noticed in the voluminous discussion my observation that a symmetrical spinnaker on a modern yacht is, by some definitions, a square sail. Of course, nobody calls it a square sail - which is the point of the whole discussion. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 20:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Maritime technologies

Just a thought on terminology. The various experts on the prehistory of Austronesian maritime technologies use precisely that terminology: "maritime technology". It is a term used 18 times in the Oxford Handbook of Prehistoric Oceania. You also find Horridge using the word "technology" to describe Austronesian boat development (though the ideas of Horridge are now being challenged by Atholl Anderson and others - I mention Horridge just to show the terminology is not the preserve of the revisionists).

So if we follow the sources, "technology" and "maritime technology" are probably terms that should appear in Wikipedia.

Incidentally there still seems to be a lot of misunderstood material on Austronesian maritime activity and technology across Wikipedia. It seems to originate from a few editors who have, I guess, a "cultural attachment" to the subject. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 08:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for this thought, ThoughtIdRetired. I'm not opposed to the use of technology to describe the practical knowledge applied to such elements as sail cloth manufacture or techniques for building catamarans and outrigger vessels. The sailing ship article primarily describes configurations of vessels, not the techniques behind their construction. Such is the basis for my edit.

I have the same sense about the "cultural attachment" observation. That's fine, as long as there is no undue emphasis, and contributions are properly referenced. From those editors' perspectives, we probably have our own "cultural attachment" and bias! Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 10:31, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Identifier Comma

Do you understand the difference between "the ship, HMS Hood, was fast" and "the ship HMS Hood was fast"? You use commas in a context where there is only one ship and the information "SMS Hood" is not needed to understand the sentence, but just an addition to remind the reader what you are talking about. Or in the case of "The classic yacht Savarona": when there is only one classic yacht you use commas, but as there are quite a number of them the information which ship is being shown is essential. In other words: The description would not make sense without the name Savarona, as there are plenty of classic yachts out there. Savarona is not the quintessential classic yacht that everybody knows. Thus - no comma.

As for the second instance ("yacht Taransay"): Ships are often described by type or prefix and name and those are not seperated by commas. Examples: "USS (United States Ship) Harry S. Truman", Her Majesty's Yacht Britannia, also known as the Royal Yacht Britannia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMY_Britannia) etc. Noone would ever write "Royal Yacht, Britannia,...".

I am not entering into an edit and reversion war with you and will therefore not edit the superyacht article again, but I urge you to re-read the NY times blog post if you do not believe me. 89.247.174.142 (talk) 15:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your kindly rendered advice. I reverted myself, based on rereading the NYT article in question. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 20:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Thankyou and have a nice day. 89.247.174.108 (talk) 08:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Vermont

I noticed you reverted my edit to add a ranking back into the article. There was a consensus here and here about adding this sort of cruft to city articles. It would be great if you could save us all a lot of time and revert your edit. Thanks for your understanding. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:01, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate your engaging here, User:Magnolia677. After reviewing the two discussions that you cite, I don't concur. Therefore, I have started a discussion at Talk:Vermont#CNBC rating of states. I encourage you to engage, there. HopsonRoad (talk) 21:13, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Sailing/Forces on sails/balance

I've just been reading an interesting paper on balance in traditional sailing vessels ( Colin Palmer (2009) Reflections on the Balance of Traditional Sailing Vessels, International Journal of Nautical Archaeology, 38:1, 90-96, DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-9270.2008.00206.x ). That is "balance" as the term used by yacht designers to ensure that a boat does not have lee helm or excessive weather helm. It discusses the traditional method of working out the centre of effort of the sails (CE) and the centre of lateral resistance of the hull (CLR). These are respectively taken as the geometric centre of the sails and the lateral profile of the hull. But generally, these do not coincide. The imbalance of these forces should theoretically produce a turning moment on the boat, making control difficult. This does not happen. The CE (as calculated in this way) is positioned forward of the CLR – the difference is termed "lead" and is simply a rule of thumb to adjust reality to a theory that inadequately explains what is going on. One could even go so far as to call this a "fudge factor".

What is actually happening is that neither the CE or the CLR are positioned reliably at the geometric centre of sails or hull. Thinking of both as aerofoils, the sum of the lift forces is usually centred, for sails, at about 40% back from the leading edge (aeronautics)/luff (sailing). For traditional hulls, the difference is greater, with the CLR at about 20% to 35% of the waterline length behind the stem.

Neither Sailing nor Forces on sails really mention balance in anything approaching the "standard" explanation. One might expect the traditional methods of calculating CE and CLR to appear in it, as this is mentioned in many books on sailing (David L Nichols' The Working Guide to Traditional Small-Boat Sails, publ. Breakaway Books, 2006 isbn=9781891369674 is a good example of this). However, in the light of Palmer's paper, it would also be better to explain why "lead" is a rule of thumb, and the real aero/hydrodynamic position of rig and hull. There is clearly a lot of experimental work that has been done on this new way of thinking, so the old traditional method of judging the necessary lead of CE ahead of CLR is, I suggest, obsolescent at best.

(Other interesting points touched on in the paper include how a headsail, when used in conjunction with a mainsail, generates more force than the simple ratio of its sail area to the mainsail. I have seen comments on the interaction between sails elsewhere. In short, multiple sails reduce efficiency.)

The reason for raising this here is that I have not read any of the sources supporting the content of either of these articles relevant to this post. Therefore I do not feel qualified to go messing with the articles. However, if you wanted to take a look at the IJNA article, you might find material to add to either. It is only 8 pages long – obviously containing much more than I have summarised here. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 22:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for writing these thought-provoking observations! I’m out of my country for two months, so I don’t anticipate devoting time to this article. I would appreciate any improvements you can make. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 00:53, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)