How about either a primary source, or a well-documented secondary source, preferable in print? A dictionary, and especially a web-dictionary that doesn't provide sources, is neither.
Goddamnit, the amount of people in Wikipedia discussions that don't know how sourcing works is bloody disgraceful.
Oh boy. Another one of those who think the reader won't follow the link. In short, the article was source with only one link, to urbandictionary.com. So, the editor said, quite openly, that a single source, and that being only a definition on a website, is not enough.
Who are these people? People asking you to provide reliable sources for your articles. As a Maths Freak, you should know better. Instead, you come whining on Slashdot that Wikipedia doesn't want to be your personal soapbox. Boohoohoo.
Well, yeah. No third-party references is a clear violation of the notability rules. It's as objective as you can get. So why would you even start to write an article if you know beforehand that it will be deleted?
I'm so very sorry Wikipedia isn't willing to give out advertising. Not. Go pay for your own bandwidth, you freeloading leeches.
Stop moving the goalposts. What I do is irrelevant, you stated that Scott Adams worked hard for his money. Objectively speaking, no he doesn't; not compared to a common labourer. And that's not even considering that most of Adams' 'work' consists of him being able to exercise his personal enjoyment.
Ah, the poor man. He had to write a few books to get the capital to start his own business. That's definitely worse than slaving 40 hours a week, 48 weeks a year, for 50 years to just get a modest retirement.
Cry me a fucking river. Parent poster is right: Adams is whining about his privileges being slightly curtailed.
Fuck off, moron. You overlooked the 'stock' part in my post to go on your MS approved fingerpointing to third-party apps. Well, sucks to be you, to be shown a fool in public, then.
There is already proof that something stinks. Ford has a long history of being able to make decent cars in Europe, and living off of subsidies in the U.S. Yes, I count the SUV loophole in CAFE as a subsidy, and Ford was one of the first to benefit from it. So obviously the company can do better. Why don't they?
Higher-performing engines? Don't make me laugh. In terms of power relative to displacement and vehicle weight, European and Japanese engines wipe the floor with the best of what the USA has to offer.
The only reason you don't see more advanced cars from U.S. manufacturers is that old production technology + marketing + playing loopholes in the law makes for more profits. Remember, the SUV boom was caused because SUVs counted as trucks for CAFE standards.
Minor correction: it was a HTC TyTN, not the TyTN II. Same thing. Works fine as a PDA, but the phone part is horribly integrated, locks up on UI changes, and requires a reboot (battery removal) at least once a week. And this is Microsofts number 1 partner, the showcase, for Windows Mobile on smartphones.
Ok, first you pretend that WEP offers any actual security, and then you show that you don't get HTML entities: € works just fine. Turn in your geek card, please?
WEP+MAC whitelisting is fake security. MACs can be spoofed easily, and WEP is broken.
And as for your comparison to wired Ethernet: when was the last time you saw wired Ethernet hooked up to a hub? Because that's what the equivalent of wireless is: broadcast traffic that anyone can read.
How about Windows Mobile 5 taking up to 5 seconds to change screen orientation, while interrupting an ongoing call on a stock TyTN II when you slide the keyboard in or out? Don't give me that "it's all the third-party applications'" crap, you Microsoft weenie. We got those damn WM phones as part of our corporate contract, and by the time we renewed that, we went with Nokia for a reason. At least Nokia is a phone manufacturer primarily, not a 2-bit bunch of hackers trying to push a sub-par OS places where it is not supposed to go.
You can have the last word. If you are so fucking stupid to mess up two distinct states after Googling and getting a Wikipedia link, it is useless discussing anyway.
Well, if you're starting to be snarky about reading comprehension, perhaps you noticed that Wiki page you used to slam me, specifically mentions clouds as a manifestation of vapour?
You know, I specifically mentioned I simplified a bit. But I was reacting to a poster that categorically rejected a relation between clouds and vapour. I guess your reading comprehension is not up to par with your physics knowledge?
So, I see you scooping up the dog shit in the street. I see you lather it on bread. Yet you tell me I can't refuse your shit sandwich until I take a bite? You can take your shit sandwich (aka SecuRom) and shove it.
It's enough that this game uses SecuRom. That shit can't even get its act together enough to install on a network share, let alone the things it wants to do to your Windows installation. I don't need to buy and install it to know that it will give me a shitty experience. And I buy games to have fun, not to eat shit sandwiches.
And that link is wrong. Vapour is the state where matter is in equilibrium between its gaseous state and its liquid state, which manifests as liquid droplets suspended in gas. If one link from a random website is authoritive enough for you, I can play that game as well.
Slashdot Mirror
How about either a primary source, or a well-documented secondary source, preferable in print? A dictionary, and especially a web-dictionary that doesn't provide sources, is neither.
Goddamnit, the amount of people in Wikipedia discussions that don't know how sourcing works is bloody disgraceful.
Oh boy. Another one of those who think the reader won't follow the link. In short, the article was source with only one link, to urbandictionary.com. So, the editor said, quite openly, that a single source, and that being only a definition on a website, is not enough.
Who are these people? People asking you to provide reliable sources for your articles. As a Maths Freak, you should know better. Instead, you come whining on Slashdot that Wikipedia doesn't want to be your personal soapbox. Boohoohoo.
Mart
Well, yeah. No third-party references is a clear violation of the notability rules. It's as objective as you can get. So why would you even start to write an article if you know beforehand that it will be deleted?
I'm so very sorry Wikipedia isn't willing to give out advertising. Not. Go pay for your own bandwidth, you freeloading leeches.
Mart
I can read, yes. Which is why I can confidently state you're a goal-post shifting, backpedaling hypocrite.
Mart
Because he is wealthy he must work hard? Fucking moron.
Mart
Stop moving the goalposts. What I do is irrelevant, you stated that Scott Adams worked hard for his money. Objectively speaking, no he doesn't; not compared to a common labourer. And that's not even considering that most of Adams' 'work' consists of him being able to exercise his personal enjoyment.
Mart
Ah, the poor man. He had to write a few books to get the capital to start his own business. That's definitely worse than slaving 40 hours a week, 48 weeks a year, for 50 years to just get a modest retirement.
Cry me a fucking river. Parent poster is right: Adams is whining about his privileges being slightly curtailed.
Mart
Fuck off, moron. You overlooked the 'stock' part in my post to go on your MS approved fingerpointing to third-party apps. Well, sucks to be you, to be shown a fool in public, then.
There is already proof that something stinks. Ford has a long history of being able to make decent cars in Europe, and living off of subsidies in the U.S. Yes, I count the SUV loophole in CAFE as a subsidy, and Ford was one of the first to benefit from it. So obviously the company can do better. Why don't they?
Mart
Higher-performing engines? Don't make me laugh. In terms of power relative to displacement and vehicle weight, European and Japanese engines wipe the floor with the best of what the USA has to offer.
The only reason you don't see more advanced cars from U.S. manufacturers is that old production technology + marketing + playing loopholes in the law makes for more profits. Remember, the SUV boom was caused because SUVs counted as trucks for CAFE standards.
Mart
You can't read, can you? What about stock did you not understand, you miserable worm of a Microsoft shill?
Mart
Wow! Another Apple innovation!
Mart
Minor correction: it was a HTC TyTN, not the TyTN II. Same thing. Works fine as a PDA, but the phone part is horribly integrated, locks up on UI changes, and requires a reboot (battery removal) at least once a week. And this is Microsofts number 1 partner, the showcase, for Windows Mobile on smartphones.
Ok, first you pretend that WEP offers any actual security, and then you show that you don't get HTML entities: € works just fine. Turn in your geek card, please?
Uhm, no?
WEP+MAC whitelisting is fake security. MACs can be spoofed easily, and WEP is broken.
And as for your comparison to wired Ethernet: when was the last time you saw wired Ethernet hooked up to a hub? Because that's what the equivalent of wireless is: broadcast traffic that anyone can read.
Mart
The media? Hard on Apple?! They've been giving them free advertising for the iPod and the iPhone for two years running.
Maybe, just maybe, the rampant fanboism is no longer able to paper over the fact that the emperor has no clothes?
Mart
How about Windows Mobile 5 taking up to 5 seconds to change screen orientation, while interrupting an ongoing call on a stock TyTN II when you slide the keyboard in or out? Don't give me that "it's all the third-party applications'" crap, you Microsoft weenie. We got those damn WM phones as part of our corporate contract, and by the time we renewed that, we went with Nokia for a reason. At least Nokia is a phone manufacturer primarily, not a 2-bit bunch of hackers trying to push a sub-par OS places where it is not supposed to go.
Mart
Shhh. Don't go confusing the fanbois with facts.
Mart
How about being dog slow and unreliable?
Mart
Try searching any *nix related problem. Nine times out of ten, I hit experts-exchange.com on the first Google page.
Mart
You can have the last word. If you are so fucking stupid to mess up two distinct states after Googling and getting a Wikipedia link, it is useless discussing anyway.
Mart
Well, if you're starting to be snarky about reading comprehension, perhaps you noticed that Wiki page you used to slam me, specifically mentions clouds as a manifestation of vapour?
You know, I specifically mentioned I simplified a bit. But I was reacting to a poster that categorically rejected a relation between clouds and vapour. I guess your reading comprehension is not up to par with your physics knowledge?
Mart
So, I see you scooping up the dog shit in the street. I see you lather it on bread. Yet you tell me I can't refuse your shit sandwich until I take a bite? You can take your shit sandwich (aka SecuRom) and shove it.
It's enough that this game uses SecuRom. That shit can't even get its act together enough to install on a network share, let alone the things it wants to do to your Windows installation. I don't need to buy and install it to know that it will give me a shitty experience. And I buy games to have fun, not to eat shit sandwiches.
Mart
So, oh great physicist, what exactly is liquid droplets suspended in a gas called?
Mart
And that link is wrong. Vapour is the state where matter is in equilibrium between its gaseous state and its liquid state, which manifests as liquid droplets suspended in gas. If one link from a random website is authoritive enough for you, I can play that game as well.
Mart