User talk:Rmhermen/Archive2

PZEV

Note that PZEV is a California administrative designation. Perhaps your remark on economies of scale should go into the SULEV page. Knowing the manufacturer's past behaviour it seems to me to be more likely that they are marketed where other states have requirements and mandates, rather than to achieve quantity production - do you have info to back up the statement? Best wishes, Leonard G. 23:50, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Both the Ford Focus SULEV and the Toyota Prius are available nationwide. Others are available in at least the 5 states with strict requirements. Actually it might be a good idea to merge these two articles since they seem to be about the same thing by different names. Rmhermen 04:12, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)

I don't think merging is a good idea, as an important point of the PZEV designation is its effect on the EV. I did move all of the technical stuff out a newly created SULEV page. Note that there was no SULEV page, and after working up the PZEV page (including the tech stuff) I realized that PZEV is not a technology but rather an administrative designation brought forth by political and economic forces. Leonard G. 04:30, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

In others words, its just another name for SULEV. So why does it need it one article. We could discuss why California calls it something else in the SULEV article. Rmhermen 04:33, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)

Aren't you going to move it to wikisource?WHEELER 20:34, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

PZEV is not just another name for SULEV. If you want to redirect PZEV to SULEV then SULEV should mention PZEV and how it was was used to obtain the air pollution goals originally set for the ZEV, without consideration of the various other effects attributable to BEVs, such as the energy independence available by combining BEVs with net metering PV, or the convenience of home fueling, quiet operation, etc. That seems to me to be rather off topic for SULEV, yet the importance of the historical effects of PZEV on BEVs should not be lost - that is why I created the article. Best wishes, Leonard G. 05:53, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Adminship

10,000 edits and 2 years and you're not an admin? Really? --Jiang 22:43, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

No one has ever asked. Rmhermen 22:45, Jun 28, 2004 (UTC)

I've nominated you. Please go to wikipedia:requests for adminship to accept. --Jiang 22:55, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hectares & Square Kilometers

Hi. Like you, I thought the conversion from hectares to km² (by User:Bobblewik) was not necessary. In fact, I thought that acres converted most naturally to hectares. But, then I went and looked at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers), where it says that km² is preferred for land area. And, I checked back on the history of that page --- this has been true for at least a year. So, User:Bobblewik may be correct in the conversion. -- hike395 02:46, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

However he is removing all mention of hectares -even from pages which already mention sq. km along with sq. miles. And of course, just because km² are preferred doesn't mean we can't use hectares. Rmhermen 02:54, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

I checked the line about km2 was added by Egil on March 15, 2003 with no discussion on any of the 9 talk pages of material. The only mention of hectares was a comment that we should use it when appropriate to translate acres. The MOS already allows km/h where appropriate instead of m/s. I will raise the issue on that page. Rmhermen 03:26, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

Great, you did a more thorough job of checking than I did, thanks! -- hike395 10:53, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I offered a proposal about hectares that I thought was generous to those that think km² are worse. But the debate just went round in circles and nobody wanted to accept my proposal or offer a reasonably bounded counter-proposal. Strongest dissent came from the non-metric world and strongest support came from the metric world, so I weighted the opinions on metric units accordingly. In the absence of an agreement or further discussion, I decided that the issue was no longer controversial with metric readers. I agree with you that we should try to get on. All my work is targetted at improvements to Wikipedia for the benefit of the reader. If the issue is still causing concern in the metric world, I will be happy to hear if people think I should confine myself the proposal.

Pending any further agreement, for values between 1 and 1000 hectares (i.e. 10,000 m² and 10 km²), I will leave the pre-existing reference to hectares within the text. Thanks for your feedback. Trying to help.
Bobblewik 14:31, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have posted a question about consensus on the measurements debate page. Thanks.
Bobblewik 15:49, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Soft drinks

Did you know that "real" companies may actually be part of larger companies? Marcus2 16:38, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Dr. Pepper/7up is part of CadburySchweppes, not Pepsi. But it is produced by the Dr. Peper/ 7 up company not Cadbury in England. Rmhermen 16:43, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

Than why does Pepsi carry Dr. Pepper/7up drinks and no one else? Marcus2 16:47, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Pepsi purchased the overseas production rights to 7up when Cadbury purchased the company in 1995. Pepsi does not usually market Dr. Pepper which is seen as competition for its Pepsi product. In fact Pepsi test marketed Storm in the U.S. as competition to 7up. 7up products are produced in the US by a complex of company bottlers, independent bottlers, Pepsi bottlers, even some Coke bottlers -all of whom participate in the marketing schemes. Rmhermen 16:54, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

I have never seen 7up in a Coke-style bottle. Marcus2 17:15, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC) I have only seen 7up bottles in the Pepsi style. Marcus2 17:17, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

They are all produced in 7up style bottles. Rmhermen 17:22, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

Very good, but the 7up style bottle is identical to the Pepsi style one, as the Sprite style is identical to the Coke style. Marcus2 17:51, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Actually Pepsi current lemon-lime product is Sierra Mist. I had forgotten that one. I am not sure that the bottles are the same or more similar they are to Coke or generic bottles. I remember to look next time I am in the supermarket. Rmhermen 18:00, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

Sometimes a company can have more than one type of a certain product. Good luck with your discoveries going to the supermarket. Marcus2 18:06, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Dr Pepper/7up and Pepsi are not the same company. They are two companies in competition. Pepsi does sell 7up outside of the US but that is it. Rmhermen 18:15, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)

How do you know they are in "competition"? 7up products are stored in Pepsi bottles as far as I know and are stored in Pepsi soda machines, Pepsi refrigerators, etc. I end the topic here, at least for a while and I don't care if you post another response because I have my own judgment. Marcus2 17:09, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Lunar Skyhook

For the stationary cable type of space elevator, the Lagrange points are indeed relevant. L1 and L2 are equivalent to GEO for the Earth: below there, the net force on a piece of the cable is downward, above there it's upward (outward). Check out the plot of the pseudopotential field on [1] For the cable to stay up, the total force on the upper limb of the system must be a little greater than the total force on the lower limb. Imagine the cable being draped over a mountain pass, on a frictionless surface. So the cable has to straddle one of the L points -- it doesn't have to extend all the way down to the surface. The problem for the Moon is that the L points are very far out, I don't remember the figures, but >100,000 km, so a lunar space elevator would be much longer than one for Earth.

There are also orbiting skyhook designs, which are much shorter but need more active management and can't tap the energy of the Moon. E.g. the rotovator, a cable which spins around its mid point fast enough that when the tips are close to the surface they have little relative speed -- visualize a bicycle wheel rolling down the street and subtract the rim and all but two opposing spokes.
--wwoods 20:33, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

By the way,

"WARNING: This page is 52 kilobytes long. Please consider condensing the page and moving the detail to another article so it is not approaching or in excess of 32KB."

You might want to wipe any discussions that are no longer active; they'll still be available via the page history.

No, current requested practice is not to delete anything but to move it to an archive page such as talk:Rmhermen/Archive1.

Biodiesel

Hi, I'd be more than happy for you to help merge a summary of the material I moved out to Biodiesel recipe (and later to Biodiesel production) back into the article. Its just that much of the material I moved out was first/second person and that made it innapropriate. It also had varying degrees of detail, much of it too detailed for the general biodiesel article. - Taxman 16:54, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)

I don't have much of a problem with it being moved - in fact we already moved some of it to How to make biodiesel. But I checked and think those two are fairly different. Rmhermen 17:03, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)

Extinct peerage dignities

The list is presently incomplete—I don't believe it to be possible to make an exhaustive list of the lower peerage dignities. -- Emsworth 23:52, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC) So it wouldn't be wrong to add extinct titles to the Peerage pages then? Rmhermen 02:42, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)

You're a sysop!

I'm pleased to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now a sysop. Please read the Administrators' reading list to learn about your new privileges and responsibilities and what special tasks sysops perform. Cheers! Cecropia | Talk 00:22, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Krizevci

I noticed that Kri?evačko veliko spravi?će isn't described. The name means something like "The big happenning of Krizevci", but I'm not sure about the exact meaning of the word spravi?će, that's in the kajkavski dialect I'm not proficient in.

I think the "figurative pearl" refers to some sort of an artifact found in the church of Saint Anne, but it's possible that it's a name for something else. Greek Catholic is a known term, you can read up on it on that page, it's just spelled somewhat incorrectly on the page, I'll go fix that.

These things are from the text added by the anonymous author, I didn't have time to read up on all of it elsewhere and fill in the details, I just made the article less unreadable... --Shallot 16:33, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

After a bit of googling, it should be all fixed now. Thanks. --Shallot 17:01, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

To Anacreon in Heaven

Sorry! I din't realize it was a song. It just looked really weird. I'll see if I can restore it. --Merovingian✍Talk 13:18, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)

---

Adult themes and the Scooby Gang

Thank you for cutting off the accidental duplicated text. I appreciate it. Marcus2 16:34, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Surely we can find more adult themes in this show. Do we have a page about this interesting topic in general? Adult themes in Cartoons Rmhermen 16:41, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)

TV Schedules

I've added the notice "all times are Eastern and Pacific" to the four schedules I've made thus far. Feel free to edit the notice for more specificity. Mike H 17:05, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)

Casualty statistics

You asked:

What was your source for your casualty update on Casualties in the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq? Your numbers differ slightly from those of the AP[2]. Rmhermen 05:13, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

They were mostly from http://icasualties.org/oif/. They list the name and date of death for each casualty. I think they sometimes count recent casualties from news reports before they show up in the official figures from DOD that the AP story was quoting. The discrepancies for other countries are surprising, though; I think I'll send email to inquire about them at their Contact Us link. Neow 18:34, Jul 8, 2004 (UTC)

To add to the confusion CNN.com is running a headline that "Coaltion suffers 1,000 death in Iraq". We list 987. I have no idea how they got their number. Rmhermen 13:20, Jul 9, 2004 (UTC)

We only had 987 listed because our article hasn't had its counts updated since the morning of July 6th, and there have been 13 more coalition deaths since then. The count at http://icasualties.org/oif is currently exactly 1000. Neow 18:50, Jul 9, 2004 (UTC)

I saw that you updated the count of casualties from an AP story (and actually reduced some of the numbers), but those daily AP stories are another case of the news media using out-of-date counts from the Pentagon (see [3] for a story that explicitly acknowledges that the Pentagon's numbers usually lag events on the ground by a few days).

I have only seen two web sites that maintain a full list of coalition casualties including each person's name, home country, date of death, and place and cause of death: the cnn.com site (which also has photos), and http://icasualties.org/oif, which I prefer to use since it is updated more frequently and often includes recent deaths that haven't been added to the CNN site yet. (Mostly, though, these two sites agree quite closely.)

Given the fact that these sites give actual names to back up their counts, if another site (or the Pentagon) quotes a smaller number (particularly for troops from countries outside the U.S. who have been listed as dead for months), it seems clear that the information on the CNN/icasualties sites is simply more complete, as it wouldn't make sense to assume that CNN could mistakenly list people as dead for months when they actually hadn't died, since their families would surely notice, and then they'd have to correct their list. Neow 22:26, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

Interestingly the icasualties site while never expaining all of their sources does complain that your other source, CNN, is inconsistent and doesn't reveal all of its sources. I would rather use one source that clearly states its sources. I expect they will match up in the end (although I can't explain the foreign casualties). Rmhermen 22:52, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

That note complaining about CNN on the icasualties Methodologies page was apparently written back in July 2003 - I think at that point the CNN page was more problematic than it is now, and the icasualties people just haven't updated their Methodologies writeup. Also, while the list of sources on their front page is pretty paltry, if you actually drill down on the numbers at icasualties.org, you'll see that most of the individual names listed do have links to news stories about the relevant incidents. Neow 23:45, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

imminent threat

Hi Rmhermen, I currently perceive an imminent threat of "childlovers"' links (List of self-identified pederasts and pedophiles, NAMBLA, Wikipedia talk:External links) and abuse of requests of comments on user conduct at wikipedia. Could you check that please? Best Get-back-world-respect 23:29, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

date linking

I was wholly unaware of this date preference feature and its requirements. I was only removing the links because I consider them inappropriate in terms of content, but will now change this practice. Thank you. - Centrx 01:05, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Vitis vinifera

Added image from foreign language wikipedia. Is this the right one now? -- Chris 73 | Talk 15:35, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

yes Rmhermen

message in a bottle

Hello Rmhermen: i notice that you've been helping cleaning up some of my messes, so thanks. i have been trying to figure out how to post pictures, but with no success. i have gone through what the HELP has to ofer, but to no avail. Any more suggestions? All the pictures that I have in mind are my own, save one from a book published in 1917, which makes it usable, I think

Is this the sort of question I should be directing to an administrator?

I am statrting a piece on the Henry Ford Museum, [now called, I think, The Ford] as an offering

Carptrash 14:25, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

EasyTimeline

Hi Rmhermen, somehow somebody messed up, so EasyTimeline is not invoked on any Wikipedia since a few days. I tried to reach a developer with server access through wikitech two times, but too much is going on there apparantly, will try now on IRC. Erik Zachte 22:38, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Bibles

A present, something to play with Modern English Bible translations Refdoc 19:14, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

BABY K

This page was deleted on July 17, 2004 because of suspicion of copyright violations. However, the material in question was quoted and cited appropriately. The entire contribution is mine, with the obvious exception of the properly cited and referenced quotations. This contribution was based on a major essay written for a graduate course on bioethics I took at Cleveland State University. I have earlier posted a similar manuscript at http://babykcase.homestead.com/

D. John Doyle MD PhD djdoyle@hotmail.com

Addendum - July 27, 2004 It has been some time since my Baby K contribution was deleted in error because of suspicion of copyright violations. The apparent copyright violations wre actually quoted material and were properly cited and referenced. I would remind everyone that the material submitted is entirely my intellectual property. I would appreciate it if someone would send me an e-mail about what I can do to fix this problem or otherwise help with this situation. Thanks,

D. John Doyle MD PhD djdoyle@hotmail.com

Identities of hijackers

rmhermen,

I left some questions and comments for you at Talk:Abdulaziz al-Omari, Talk:Waleed al-Shehri, and Talk:Organizers of the September 11, 2001 attacks respectively.

Quadell (talk) 17:55, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)

Image deletion

Hi. When deleting an image you need to click on the "del" link under the "File history" heading. Clicking on the deletion tab only deletes the image description page (Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide#Deleting an image). For example Image:Hamza al-Ghamdi.bmp, the image description page has been deleted but not the image itself. Maximus Rex 09:45, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Khaled al-Harbi

Answer on Talk:Khaled al-Harbi. Quadell (talk) 23:35, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

Eddie Murphy and the use of "African-American"

Thanks for the heads-up. Done. Peace. deeceevoice

Ziad Jarrah

Today I vastly updated the Ziad Jarrah article, using the 9/11 Commission Report and other sources. I'm pretty sure of my facts, but my bias tends toward the conspiratorial. Could you look it over and see if anything strikes you as inaccurate or POV? Quadell (talk) 19:43, Aug 3, 2004 (UTC)

EasyTimeline

EasyTimeline is back now. Cheers, Erik Zachte 16:40, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

26 Most Wanted Saudis

Sorry, I haven't seen the list. It would be useful information. By the way, much of the terrorism pages are in horrible shape. Check out 2000 millennium attack plots for instance. Quadell (talk) 16:50, Aug 8, 2004 (UTC)

Leucite and 1911 Encyclopedia

Hi, please see Talk:Leucite I did as you asked. Ortolan88 04:14, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Portrayed

Hmm.. I really didn't like "promoted", and it seems you really didn't like "profiled". Now portrayed is a good word, wish I'd thought of that myself. =) -- Jao 12:41, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Deletions

As per point four of the Wikipedia policy at Wikipedia:Deletion_guidelines_for_administrators#On_deleting_pages, please do not include {{delete}} in your deletion summary. It is obviously unnecessary and clutters the deletion log. Thanks. blankfaze | (беседа!) 01:00, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sorry I hadn't reread the deletion policy in the last week. I wondered about removing it. But since that is what comes up automatically I left it there. I just looked at the deletion log - I didn't realize that it expanded there. Rmhermen 03:35, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

National Parks List

Just a description. I thought I had marked it as a minor change. Some of the lists already have this type of notation. One list has an alpha and by state list. For someone looking for info on a state, it might help to pick them out. Robbie Giles 13:11, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

Categories

I am interested in the categories aspect of the wikipedia. Is there a specific interest group about those? How can I find out? Robbie Giles 13:11, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

Messages to anons

Thanks for pointing me to the 'Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. ' message. I know it and use it, but i'm hopelessly oldfashioned, and for that reason i sometimes like to write something more personal to people. Lady Tenar 14:03, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) --- hi... did you mean the dates should be may 5, 2000 or 5 may, 2000 and they will display correctly? do they need to be linked to register as dates? SpookyMulder 13:31, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---

People making a spectacle of themselves

Thanks for restoring the quotations to the spectacles (sic) article, as well as the careful copyedit and improvements. Some people . . . Ortolan88 14:34, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC) PS -- probably wimpy four-eyed spectacles wearers, like me. O88

WikiProject aircraft

Hi. The switch from the data tables to a text-based specifications section was the product of nearly a month of discussions amongst WikiProject aircraft participants, first on the WikiProject Aircraft talk page (see old talk archived here) and then on the external web-board currently being used for discussions that you're apparently already aware of.

Regarding the "two-for, two-against" result that can be seen on the board, since then, one of the people who voted to keep the table (me) changed sides and the other changed his opinion to "don't care". Unfortunately, the board doesn't seem to allow people to change their votes in the poll. You're the second person today to express puzzlement over the result, so we should probably post a message on the board explaining why it appears the way that it does.

Hope this helps. Cheers --Rlandmann 05:12, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I guess what's most significant to me is that the people who contributed to the discussion are the people who are reasonably active in contributing aircraft articles, ie. those who are most closely affected by the change. No disrespect intended, but I keep a fairly close eye on new aircraft pages, and I don't remember the last one that I saw from you. Please don't take that the wrong way!

From experience using the new format, I can personally say that it takes me significantly less time and effort to work with the text specifications. I was probably the most outspoken opponent of making this change, but now I'm very glad we did.

Although I was the one who actually implemented the change, it was far from my decision. It wasn't my idea, and I argued long and loud against it. It was a group decision, so it's probably more appropriate to express any dissatisfaction with it at the WikiProject Aircraft forum or, if you're more comfortable with it, on the talk page.

Finally, let's not forget that the data tables were also implemented by a similar decision by WikiProject aircraft members. This decision has at least as much legitimacy, to me at least. Enjoy your break! --Rlandmann 14:13, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I see that you're rather rabidly in favor of the table format, but before you go making decisions for other projects, please take a look at some of the reasoning and discussion that has and is going on at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aircraft. Also, there is a separate poll on the forum you so distrust which suggests at least 4 users favor text over the table, and 0 votes out of five suggesting a return to the data table. Adding your vote against, that brings the vote to 5:1 in favor of plain text. -eric 22:58, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

Unit 731 protected

FYI, I've protected Unit 731 and moved the disputed text/photo to the talk page. Feel free to discuss there. Thanks. Fuzheado | Talk 02:04, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Talk:The Brighter Day

Responded. Mike H 00:21, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

I'm inclined to randomly Vfd

While as a good citizen I must respect an etiquette that was reached by consensus, I would like to know how you would react to obviously unjustified VfD postings on articles you work on. Am I over-reacting? Would you be content to wait five days? And if after five days some other user VfD'd the page? Or the same user renewed it?

Will you back me up the next time someone tries calls a baseless vote? Or do you maintain that going through the VfD process, regardless of the merit of the charge, serves the good of wiki?

--LegCircus 03:02, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

I have the copyright

yeah I have the copyright, let me know if you have any further problems

I have the copyright 'cause I wrote the article

--LegCircus 15:26, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

ACORN

I posted the message as you suggested. Will you do me a favor and format the ACORN article so that the message you suggested is as it should be? Like, I don't know, should there be a box around it? Should it be at top or bottom? It's at bottom as stands.

--LegCircus 16:07, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

World Tourism Rankings

I noticed you changed the ,s to .s in the table for World Tourism Rankings. FYI - the commas are correct under British punctuation rules, so changing them is sort of like changing British spelling to American, which is generally frowned upon unless the topic calls for one form or another. I didn't change it back - just thought I'd mention it. - DavidWBrooks 21:11, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The Manual of Style says use periods. See [[4]. Rmhermen 21:14, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

How right you are - I stand corrected. (Actually I'm sitting, but I'm still corrected) - DavidWBrooks 01:24, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

U.S. state pages

What with the main infobox being properly styles - the state trivia info box seemed a bit out of place - so I making them into lists when I come across them. They all have different sets of data as well - so it'd be tough to make a nice template. ed g2s • talk 23:03, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

These tables appear on almost every state page and are all formatted differently - with different title etc. They're too wide to float right - so they have to take up a certain amount of space anyway. The UL's just style nicer with the rest of the page and I'd consider it to be more of a list than tabular data. ed g2s • talk 23:16, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Apologies for not including the band name at the beginning of my ConstruKction of Light entry - am a bit of a newbie around here, and although I've done my best to read the help pages etc, there's still a lot to take in.

So all advice and criticism is much appreciated!

Sugar beet

re; 'I reverted your change to sugar cane -sugar beets is the plural of sugar beet, at least in the American Midwest. Rmhermen 13:06, Sep 11, 2004'

Well, obviously there may be a language issue there. But it is a crop we are talking about, not individual plants (isn't it?). The word for a crop is usually inherently plural. Note that the article is called sugar beet. In Britain, beets is an acceptable word, but only for a collection of individual plants (as in 'he's just pulled up those beets'); the crop is beet. The article now says 'an amount of sugar beets'; if it is a plural it would be 'a number of sugar beets'. cf. 'an amount of money' against 'a number of coins'. Imc 14:42, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"more than 6 times the amount of sugar beets produced" sounds corect to me. "more than 6 times the amount of sugar beet produced" would be wrong. The amounts it is comparing are ton of sugar beets versus tons of sugar cane which is odd - it should probably compare sugar produced from those sources as the extraction rates are not equivalent. Rmhermen 15:04, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

North america

Rmhermen, why did you return the text "occupation of North America" to the American Indian page? This page (and the paragraph in question) deals with Indians in South America just as well. Gadykozma 16:23, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Good point; however, your term "European invasion" seemed POV. Rmhermen 23:25, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

I don't see what's POV about it: they were Europeans, and they invaded. However, if you don't like it, how about "European occupation"? Gadykozma 00:33, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

EV Fans

Why tone down my Ford/Norwegian comment - they often give mealy mouthed explanations of why they could not release to U.S. drivers but this is so bald faced that they simply can't cover it up or justify it. I can see why they would want to hide it, however, and am wondering why anyone would help them. Please justify your edit - here, or move this and your answer to the EV talk page. I will watch. Thanks, Leonard G. 05:28, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The text still says that Ford destroyed the cars which is exactly like GM did with its cars after ending its California/Arizona program which you oddly did not mention. I note that there is no article for the Think City, perhaps you could write one. Rmhermen 13:40, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My point was that Ford had a bona fide offer of both complete indemnification and removal offshore - something that Ford did not have for their Ranger EV (I leased and drove one for four years, BTW, and ran it on home generated PV power). Similar considerations apply to GM. They simply did not feel they could make money of the maintenance tail associated with the batteries (everything else is much longer lived then on an ICE vehicle) and did not want to direct any effort to moving the vehicles out of a specialty niche. Honda also terminated their program with extreme prejudice. There remain only a few Ford Ranger EVs with lead-acid batteries, which were sold (for about $20k), and some Toyota RAV4 EVs, which have not been terminated although no longer sold (I saw one on the road last week). I would have bought one but had the Ranger on lease at the time.

It looks like the next generation of commercial EVs suitable for boulevards (not NEVs) will come from China and possibly Japan, sometime in the next five years. Zap claims to be working on a US version of a Chinese vehicle but they are not responding to either e-mails or telephone calls, even though promoted on their web site - that does not look good for the short term. -- Leonard G. 15:05, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

False precision in metric conversions?

I haven't changed the metric length and flow figures you added to Au Sable River (Michigan), hoping for what is plausible, that you really did come up with metric measurements rather than converting from imperial ones. If my hope is correct, IMO it would be valuable to cite the source on the talk page, to avoid the suspicion that your figures are not part of WP's history of unwarranted precision in derived measurements.
Matter of fact, i'll ask you directly, did you calculate the 225 figure? If you did, the article should say "approximately 140 miles (over 200 km)". (If you found 225 in a reliable source, i would defend cutting a corner by ignoring the possibility of 139.498 to 139.500, and writing "225 km (140 miles)".)
--Jerzy(t) 14:04, 2004 Sep 16 (UTC)

I am sure the figures were in Imperial although I can't find the source right now. However I would defend using 140 miles (225 km) -rounding to quarters or tens is very common and doesn't necessarily imply precision. So maybe approximately 140 miles (about 225 km) which is much closer than "over 200 km" which underestimates the length by over 10% before taking into account the approximation. Rmhermen 23:16, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Sedna Planitia

I noticed you created Sedna Planitia with a stub notice. Is there really anything more that can be said about Sedna Planitia? -- SS 04:51, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

We could say how large it is, where on Venus it is, how it compares to other regions. Rmhermen 05:25, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

History of Greenland

If you feel the graphic is a copyvio, feel free to delete it - or better yet, make Wikipedia our own version. :) [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 04:51, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I removed the image. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 05:17, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The Henry Ford

I saw this was listed on your User page, so I wanted to let you know that I've created an article for it. What a wonderful place, eh? Would welcome any additions or copyedits you want to make. -- Netoholic @ 06:11, 2004 Sep 17 (UTC)

You even did the redirects. Good start. Rmhermen 12:22, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I have to give some credit to your photos though. Very nice. -- Netoholic @ 13:52, 2004 Sep 17 (UTC)

Ageing

Oops. Guess I don't know all the British spelling variants yet :P I appreciate the notice. Sarge Baldy 15:34, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)