Content deleted Content added
→Converting hyphens to em-dashes: new section |
m archiving |
||
Line 155: | Line 155: | ||
::::You are certainly right that they're a bit further spread out than most stations to be collectively considered. However, I do believe they tie together fairly well. The track junction was closer to Lowell Street than to the former station itself, and the distance between Central and Lowell Streets is barely half of the distance from either to the next station (North Somerville / Ball Square @ Broadway, Somerville Highlands @ Hancock, Winter Hill / Gilman Square @ Medford). They're literally tied together by Somerville Junction Park and the Community Path, and I believe that the former factory (now the Maxwells Green site adjacent to the station) was located there specifically for the junction. So there's enough linking them that I believe it'd be a better single article than two shorter articles. [[User:Pi.1415926535|Pi.1415926535]] ([[User talk:Pi.1415926535|talk]]) 02:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC) |
::::You are certainly right that they're a bit further spread out than most stations to be collectively considered. However, I do believe they tie together fairly well. The track junction was closer to Lowell Street than to the former station itself, and the distance between Central and Lowell Streets is barely half of the distance from either to the next station (North Somerville / Ball Square @ Broadway, Somerville Highlands @ Hancock, Winter Hill / Gilman Square @ Medford). They're literally tied together by Somerville Junction Park and the Community Path, and I believe that the former factory (now the Maxwells Green site adjacent to the station) was located there specifically for the junction. So there's enough linking them that I believe it'd be a better single article than two shorter articles. [[User:Pi.1415926535|Pi.1415926535]] ([[User talk:Pi.1415926535|talk]]) 02:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
::::I cannot find any evidence of it at current, but I swear I've also seen somewhere that very early on in the GLX (draft Beyond Lechmere report, perhaps) they were considering a station between the two cross streets with access from both. [[User:Pi.1415926535|Pi.1415926535]] ([[User talk:Pi.1415926535|talk]]) 02:27, 12 August 2015 (UTC) |
::::I cannot find any evidence of it at current, but I swear I've also seen somewhere that very early on in the GLX (draft Beyond Lechmere report, perhaps) they were considering a station between the two cross streets with access from both. [[User:Pi.1415926535|Pi.1415926535]] ([[User talk:Pi.1415926535|talk]]) 02:27, 12 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Mount Hermon == |
|||
I also reverted the editor and warned them about the 1R restriction (which of course keeps us from restoring the text, damn!). They ignored my warning, so I've reported them to AN3. [[User:Doug Weller|Doug Weller]] ([[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]]) 14:13, 15 August 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Reverts on Hebron, Bethlehem == |
|||
Would you care to explain why you immediately deleted my contributions, labeling them "Less clear, less neutral, not an improvement"? If you look up any city in the world, it will say, for instance, "London is the capital and most populous city of England and the United Kingdom" or "Paris the capital and most-populous city of France" or "Grimsby is a large town and seaport situated on the South Bank of the Humber Estuary close to where it reaches the North Sea". Not "London is an English/British city" or "Paris is a French city" or "Grimbsy is an English city". Saying "Hebron is a Palestinian city" seems WP:POINTy. [[User:ZinedineZidane98|ZinedineZidane98]] ([[User talk:ZinedineZidane98|talk]]) 16:20, 1 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:Not equivalent. England and France are not subject to territorial dispute or mixed jurisdictions. There are Arab communities in the WB and there are Jewish communities. "The West Bank of Palestine" is novel usage. Your edits introduce problems the existing wording avoids. [[User:Hertz1888|Hertz1888]] ([[User talk:Hertz1888#top|talk]]) 17:31, 1 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::"Not equivalent. England and France are not subject to territorial dispute or mixed jurisdictions" - Surely that is precisely why it is problematic, isn't it? cf. "Derry". You wouldn't start the article with "Derry is an Irish city" or "Derry is a British city". It is: "Derry is the second-largest city in Northern Ireland". And I can assure you there is nothing "novel" about calling Hebron/Bethlehem a city in the West Bank.... unless you're arguing that "West Bank" and "Palestine" are novelties? [[User:ZinedineZidane98|ZinedineZidane98]] ([[User talk:ZinedineZidane98|talk]]) 19:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
:::You are misquoting me and yourself. The unusual phrase you used was "the southern West Bank of Palestine", which in itself is less neutral and less accurate than the existing wording that just calls it the WB. Anyway, it's a different situation, with its own usages, much as it may strike you as "strange". [[User:Hertz1888|Hertz1888]] ([[User talk:Hertz1888#top|talk]]) 19:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'm sorry, but that's not an argument. What is your justification for deleting my contributions? Do you have a source? Is there a Wikipedia policy that I'm not aware of? [[User:ZinedineZidane98|ZinedineZidane98]] ([[User talk:ZinedineZidane98|talk]]) 08:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== FYI == |
|||
[[WP:ARBPIA3]] is now open and evidence can be submitted until September 8. [[Special:Contributions/62.90.5.221|62.90.5.221]] ([[User talk:62.90.5.221|talk]]) 09:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Converting hyphens to em-dashes == |
|||
When I was making [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Radio_propagation&diff=678935042&oldid=677602241 that edit] I felt SO GUILTY about it. I figured I'd just go back later and fix it, but now I don't have to. Good eye there, lol. |
|||
[[User talk:Jacob Gotts|{ <small><math>\mathbb{JPG}</math></small> }]] 06:38, 3 September 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:24, 3 September 2015
/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 /Archive 7 /Archive 8
Welcome!
|
Thanks - Astronomical thought for the day
I'm going to quote this from Talk:Solar_radiation and use it in my physics class today:
“Astronomical numbers are so mind-boggling, it's hard to imagine how any human can handle them. Manipulate, yes—but truly grasp? And yet, as far as we know, human consciousness is the best resource the universe has for being aware of itself!” Hertz1888 04:31, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
By the way, I happened upon your comment after reading up on Ackermann’s function and Graham’s number, so pure math had me primed for this sentiment.