User:Bob K31416/Sandbox

Hello, world!
Hello, world!

Web_colors#Color_table
Template:Background color
Template:Font color/doc

Wikipedia:REFLINKS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex

<ref name='Rosen2005'> {{cite book | last1 = Rosen | first1 = Fred | title = The historical atlas of American crime | publisher = Facts on File, Inc | year = 2005 | location = New York, New York | pages = 193 | accessdate = 2012-02-02}} </ref>

http://books.google.com/books?id=b95tLpKRy3oC&pg=PA192&lpg=PA192&dq=leo+frank+bachelors+degree&source=bl&ots=STLfpq5O7e&sig=31owmWjo2DVRcfWqnq20cuGimVc&hl=en#v=onepage&q=leo%20frank%20bachelors%20degree&f=false

Consensus poll regarding _____________________

Proposal to

Current version:

______________________________________ _______________________________ ____________________________________________________

Proposed version:

_____________________________________ ______________________________ ____________________________

signature

Support

1. .

Oppose

1. .

Additional Comments

• .

Wikipedia:Mathematical symbols

Luca leaves
big wink smiley

Isham see chapter "Technical Developments", section 6.2, p. 113

http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/topics/urlencoding.htm allowed characters for URLs and how special characters are encoded so that URL will work

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum#Quality

To specify that this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXI-e8p1Adc should start 1 minute 34 seconds in, you add #t=1m34s to the URL, like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXI-e8p1Adc#t=1m34s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_93#Verifiablility_not_truth_proposals_are_back_again.

If a reliable source A misquotes another source B, in a way that has a significant effect on A's interpretation of B, should that material in A be considered unreliable and not usable in Wikipedia?

While verifiability is needed for inclusion, it does not guarantee inclusion. Wikipedia has other policies and guidelines that affect inclusion.

While verifiability is required, it does not guarantee inclusion of material. Other policies and guidelines have additional requirements, and there are basic writing considerations such as whether the material improves the article.

While verifiability is a requirement, it is not a guarantee of inclusion. There are additional requirements from other policies and guidelines, and there are other considerations such as whether the material improves the article.

With the presence of mitral regurgitation, there are two ways for blood to leave the left ventricle when it contracts. The normal way is through the aortic valve and out to the rest of the body's vascular system. The abnormal way is back through the mitral valve and into the left atrium. Almost half of the regurgitant volume of blood will go back through the mitral valve before the aortic valve opens.

Functional or secondary mitral regurgitation can occur for normal papillary muscles, chordae, and valve leaflets. Regurgitation is caused by dilatation of the left ventricle, which stretches the mitral valve annulus and displaces the papillary muscles. This dilatation of the left ventricle can be due to dilated cardiomyopathy, including aortic insufficiency, nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and noncompaction cardiomyopathy.

http://www.mla.org/store/CID29/PID341 attribution publishing glossary

cartoon someone is wrong on the internet [1] [2]

<   (&lt;)
>   (&gt;)

http://www.audioenglish.net/dictionary/attribute.htm

http://www.themathpage.com/atrig/measure-angles.htm

http://www.cut-the-knot.org/WhatIs/WhatIsAngle.shtml

http://books.google.com/books?id=TB6xYdomdjQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=basic+geometry+birkhoff&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which summarizes existing published information, and is not meant to be a source of information that has not already been published.

In my experience, when something looked like OR, I would simply ask the editor where he got the information or if he came up with the information himself. Usually they are honest about it and then it is simple just to refer the editor to WP:NOR, delete the material, and that's usually the end of it. If instead you have a discussion re WP:VER, then I don't think it would be so simple.

I feel that the problem with the present lead sentence is just the tip of the iceberg regarding the tendency of some active editors of this policy to write for each other, rather than for the people who come to this policy page to learn about NOR. The style is awkward and there's simply poor communication here. For the most active editor here, this may be due in part to having a less than desirable understanding of the language, as evidenced by that editor's non-standard interpretations of english in a recent discussion on this talk page. See SlimVirgin's message of 22:40, 9 May 2010 near the end of the previous section.

The Pythagorean theorem has been generalized to the Law of cosines, which is similar but has an additional term involving a cosine, so that it applies to triangles in general, not just right triangles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGaza_War&action=historysubmit&diff=275938313&oldid=275931371 [3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=354093322

L A

S A IL

http://www.maa.org/editorial/knot/memes.html

<outdent>...

I think they each have their place. Taken alone, the ABOUT text needs explaining, e.g. since taken alone it is false. Wikipedia accepts original research that has been published, so the term "original research" as it is used in Wikipedia needs to be explained before that statement from ABOUT is understood.

The one I suggested above stands by itself and doesn't use any terms like verifiable and original research that need further explaining. It speaks in terms of being either published or not and is simple and clear. Note that the suggested sentence is only meant to be a lead-in and basis to explain NOR, which will follow and, for example, will explain that the Wikipedia term "original research" means unpublished original research and more.

In the past bacteremia caused by dental procedures (in most cases due to viridans streptococci, which reside in oral cavity), such as a cleaning or extraction of a tooth was thought to be clinically significant. It is important that a dentist or a dental hygienist is told of any heart problems before commencing treatment. Antibiotics are administered to patients with certain heart conditions as a precaution, although this practice has changed in the US with new American Heart Association guidelines released in 2007. Everyday tooth brushing and flossing will similarly cause bacteremia, and there is little evidence to support antibiotic prophylaxis for dental treatment. Only an extremely small number of cases of infective endocarditis might be prevented by antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures. Using antibiotics because of an upcoming dental procedure is reasonable only for patients with underlying cardiac conditions associated with the highest risk of adverse outcome from infective endocarditis. There have been similar changes in the UK as of March 2008 due to new NICE guidelines.

WP:burden

Ever since the release of the multimillion-selling Duotones in 1986, he has withstood a veritable onslaught of abuse from critics and fellow musicians alike. The heaps of invective flung in Kenny’s direction intensified when his follow-up, 1988’s Silhouette, went platinum. In fact, critical disparagement seems to run inversely to Kenny’s popularity. In truth, his rapid and seemingly effortless rise to success may be part of the reason critics and musicians come down so hard on him.

As he became more successful, he was attacked more by critics and fellow musicians. His rapid and seemingly effortless rise to success may be part of the motivation for the attacks.

table 1

Y

hyphen -

en dash –

Minus sign − −

Horse's teeth

In the year of our Lord 1432, there arose a grievous quarrel among the brethren over the number of teeth in the mouth of a horse. For thirteen days the disputation raged without ceasing. At the beginning of the fourteenth day, a youthful friar of goodly bearing asked his learned superiors for permission to add a word, and straightway, to the wonderment of the disputants, whose deep wisdom he sore vexed, he beseeched them to unbend in a manner coarse and unheard-of and to look in the open mouth of a horse and find answer to their questionings. At this, their dignity being grievously hurt, they waxed exceeding wroth; and, joining in a mighty uproar, they flew upon him and smote him, hip and thigh, and cast him out forthwith. After many days more of grievous strife, the dove of peace sat on the assembly, and they as one man declaring the problem to be an everlasting mystery because of a grievous dearth of historical and theological evidence thereof, so ordered the same writ down.[4]

==Additional images==

• 
  Heart left atrial appendage (LAA) tee view. The LAA is the small cave on the right side of the upper chamber (left atrium).

Template:Harvard_citation
(Vance 2003, p. 13) {{harv|Vance|2003|p=13}}

---

discussion of cite journal template and harv format for a source by multiple authors

Parts I and II together copied from Talk:Blood pressure #Sources with multiple authors:

---

Part I - copied from Template talk:Citation/core #Sources with multiple authors

I've been having a problem in the Blood pressure article with the links from the footnotes for Pickering 2005 to the References section. I've tried to debug it in various ways without success, except to find that the problem is related to the presence of one or more coauthors in the Pickering 2005 article. Have you tested the changes to see how they work for sources with multiple authors with respect to the link from the harv footnote to the source in a Reference section, like in the case of the Blood pressure article? Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 20:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

In the {{Cite journal}}, instead of

|first=TG|last=Pickering|coauthors=JE Hall, LJ Appel, et al

use this:

|first1=TG |last1=Pickering |first2=JE |last2=Hall |first3=LJ |last3=Appel |first4=BE |last4=Falkner |author5=et al

and instead of

{{harv|Pickering|Hall|Appel|al|2005|p=nnn}}

use this:

{{harv|Pickering|Hall|Appel|Falkner|2005|p=nnn}}

Since there are more than 3 names, the "et al" thing will happen automatically. You could also try putting in further firstn/lastn pairs up to a total of 9 (and renumber the one which I've shown as |author9=, which is unfortunate because this paper has 10 authors. The field |coauthors= doesn't work when |last2= is specified. However, don't feed more than four lastnames into {{harv}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Nice work! I incorporated your suggestion into the article.[5] : ) --Bob K31416 (talk) 00:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

---

Part II - copied from User talk:Bob K31416 #Blood Pressure

Nice to see that my suggestions worked... there's one small matter of style, that is entirely up to you. It does not affect the mechanism for the citation linking.

As I read it, the journal article in question has ten authors; however, the {{cite journal}} template allows for no more than nine authors (whether specified as |authorn=, as pairs of |firstn=/|lastn= or a mixture. I suggested four, being the minimum required for {{harv}} to behave properly and still show "et al" in the Footnotes section; but it might be better to show as many as possible under "References" (give credit where credit is due) - unfortunately there is no official method to show more than eight distinct authors, but I think that we can fiddle the system to get the last two into the page source (even though they won't actually display), by cramming them into |author9=, as below.

Basically, I have found that if you provide nine authors to {{cite journal}} it will automatically do an "et al" after a certain point; by default, this is after the eighth author, but other positions may be set (see later). So, instead of this:

|author5=et al

try this:

|first5=J |last5=Graves |first6=MN |last6=Hill |first7=DW |last7=Jones |first8=T |last8=Kurtz |author9=Sheps, SG; Roccella, EJ

which will give something like this (I shortened the title here, and removed the URL, DOI etc. purely for demonstration purposes):

Pickering, TG; Hall, JE; Appel, LJ; Falkner, BE; Graves, J; Hill, MN; Jones, DW; Kurtz, T; Sheps, SG; Roccella, EJ (2005). "Recommendations for blood pressure measurement ...". Hypertension. 45 (5): 142–61. doi:10.1161/01.HYP.0000150859.47929.8e. PMID 15611362.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

You might feel that fewer than eight distinct authors would be better. I'm not sure just how many authors are best to show; and I don't really know where to look for guidance; but let's say that you felt that six was best. You would do it using |display-authors= like this:

|first5=J |last5=Graves |first6=MN |last6=Hill |first7=DW |last7=Jones |first8=T |last8=Kurtz |author9=Sheps, SG; Roccella, EJ |display-authors=6

will give something like this:

Pickering, TG; Hall, JE; Appel, LJ; Falkner, BE; Graves, J; Hill, MN; et al. (2005). "Recommendations for blood pressure measurement ...". Hypertension. 45 (5): 142–61. doi:10.1161/01.HYP.0000150859.47929.8e. PMID 15611362.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Really though, it's entirely up to you whether you want to specify further authors in {{cite journal}} - but as I mentioned before, leave {{harv}} alone, because that won't handle more than four. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I had thought that Wikipedia style had 3 authors and then et al, but I was unable to find that recommendation anywhere when I looked for it after reading your message. I just now posed the question at the Help Desk. Regards, --Bob K31416 (talk) 02:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

To which I have added a supplementary, which covers my earlier observation about the nine-author restriction. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

That's a good addition to the good discussion there. After reading yours and other discussion, my current feeling is: 1. all authors should be displayed in the references or footnotes sections except in additional mentioning of a reference, e.g. when something like {{harv}} is used. 2. the undocumented "display-authors=" should be documented. 3. the number of authors in {{cite journal}} and similar templates should be increased beyond 9, as one of the respondents at the Help Desk suggested. If that's not feasible, your workaround for increasing the number should be documented, and lastly 4. guidance for the use of "et al" should be given in the guidelines. I'll wait a little while to see what else comes up in the discussion before mentioning these points at the Help Desk discussion. --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I found where I got the idea that et al. should be used after 3 authors, sort of. (I was editing a medical article at the time.):[6]

AMA citation guidelines suggest that if there are more than six authors, include only the first three, followed by et al.

But the sentence that came after it said something different:

The Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (URM) citation guidelines list up to six authors, followed by et al if there are more than six.

--Bob K31416 (talk) 01:46, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I modified the article to follow the AMA guideline for Pickering 2005. Also modified 6 {{harv}} inline citations that were affected by the Pickering 2005 modification.[7] --Bob K31416 (talk) 05:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Have just looked at that edit. I guess it works; but to meet the same guideline, you could have left all the {{harv}} alone, and also left {{cite journal}} as it was with the exception of simply adding |display-authors=3 to it. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I recognized that but I felt that it might give an editor the false impression that there were only 4 authors.

BTW, I was curious how you came across or discovered the very useful "display-authors=".

Just for fun, I looked to see if there was a Wikipedia article on "et al." and I was redirected to et al. Here's an excerpt from it.

APA style uses et al. if the work cited was written by more than six authors; MLA style uses et al. for more than three authors.

Regards, --Bob K31416 (talk) 14:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

If you look at {{cite journal}}, |display-authors= is not shown in the five different sets of blank parameters; but later on, under Legend:

author: Author. Use to specify a single author of the paper, or alternately, to specify all the authors of the paper in whatever format desired. If you use author to specify all the authors, do not specify the following author-related parameters. last works with first to produce last, first;. These parameters produce the maximum metadata and should be used if possible. author2, last2, first2 and subsequent should be used for co-authors (up to 9 will be displayed before truncation with "et al". authorlink works either with author or with last & first to link to the appropriate article (InterWikimedia links) coauthors: Full name of additional author or authors. Please use 'author2', 'author3', etc instead. author-separator: over-ride the default semi-colon that separates authors' names. mode: Sets element separator, default terminal punctuation, and certain capitalization according to the value provided. For |mode=cs1, element separator and terminal punctuation is a period (.); where appropriate, initial letters of certain words are capitalized ('Retrieved...'). For |mode=cs2, element separator is a comma (,); terminal punctuation is omitted; where appropriate, initial letters of certain words are not capitalized ('retrieved...'). These styles correspond to Citation Style 1 and Citation Style 2 respectively. To override default terminal punctuation use postscript. author-mask: contributor-mask: editor-mask: interviewer-mask: subject-mask: translator-mask: Replaces the name of the (first) author with em dashes or text. Set <name>-mask to a numeric value n to set the dash n em spaces wide; set <name>-mask to a text value to display the text without a trailing author separator; for example, "with". The numeric value 0 is a special case to be used in conjunction with <name>-link—in this case, the value of <name>-link will be used as (linked) text. In either case, you must still include the values for all names for metadata purposes. Primarily intended for use with bibliographies or bibliography styles where multiple works by a single author are listed sequentially such as shortened footnotes. Do not use in a list generated by {{reflist}}, <references /> or similar as there is no control of the order in which references are displayed. Mask parameters can take an enumerator in the name of the parameter (e.g. |authorn-mask=) to apply the mask to a specific name. display-authors: display-contributors: display-editors: display-interviewers: display-subjects: display-translators: Controls the number of author (or other kind of contributor) names that are displayed. By default, all authors are displayed. To change the displayed number of names, set the parameter to the desired number. For example, |display-authors=2 will display only the first two authors in a citation (and not affect the display of the other kinds of contributors). |display-authors=0 is a special case suppressing the display of all authors including the et al. |display-authors=etal displays all authors in the list followed by et al. Aliases: none. postscript: Controls the closing punctuation for a citation; defaults to a period (.); for no terminating punctuation, specify |postscript=none – leaving |postscript= empty is the same as omitting it, but is ambiguous. Additional text, or templates that render more than a single terminating punctuation character, will generate a maintenance message. |postscript= is ignored if quote is defined. author-name-separator: over-ride the default comma that separates authors' names. display-authors: Truncate the list of authors at an arbitrary point with "et al". Still include the first 9 authors to allow metadata to be generated.

The main thing that makes me want to fit in as many authors as poss (even if only three are actually displayed) is this business about "metadata". It's principally to do with COinS, see also Wikipedia:WikiProject Microformats/COinS. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a very good point re COinS. I haven't looked into COinS before but it looks like all the authors should be put in the metadata for this reason that you mentioned. It seems that your workaround for adding more authors than 9 would work with COinS too. I plan to make that change in Pickering 2005 if it works with {{harv}}. --Bob K31416 (talk) 16:20, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I just made the change.[8] --Bob K31416 (talk) 17:01, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, since the COinS metadata is generated by the {{cite journal}}, and not by {{harv}}, you only need four authors in {{harv}} and it will et al. automatically. I would suggest "Falkner" for the fourth, rather than that long string that you have used. For {{cite journal}}, fit in as many as possible. Having reviewed the mechanism by which it works, I'd say that the following may give the best result:

|first1=TG |last1=Pickering |first2=JE |last2=Hall |first3=LJ |last3=Appel |first4=BE |last4=Falkner |first5=J |last5=Graves |first6=MN |last6=Hill |first7=DW |last7=Jones |first8=T |last8=Kurtz |author9=Sheps, SG; Roccella, EJ |display-authors=3

--Redrose64 (talk) 17:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

That's true, but I was trying to make the situation clearer for other editors who would encounter the {{harv}}s on the edit page and may not know that there are other authors. Perhaps I should use what you suggested and clarify for editors using hidden comments. How does that sound?--Bob K31416 (talk) 17:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hidden comment, yes; this could contain a list of the fifth and subsequent authors - or an instruction such as "fifth and subsequent authors omitted, see documentation for Template:Harv" --Redrose64 (talk) 17:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again and for all your help. --Bob K31416 (talk) 03:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

NICE Guidelines re digoxin

• p. viii - Other key recommendations cover the use of the electrocardiogram in diagnosis, and the preference in most patients for beta-blockers or rate-limiting calcium antagonists over digoxin for rate control.
• p. 17 - 3. In patients with permanent AF, who need treatment for rate control:

beta-blockers or rate-limiting calcium antagonists should be the preferred initial monotherapy in all patients digoxin should only be considered as monotherapy in predominately sedentary patients. p. 17 25

• p. 59 - In clinical practice, digoxin monotherapy may only be adequate for the older,

sedentary patient.

• p. 59 - Rate control may not always be achieved with a single drug. Combination therapy, for example digoxin plus a beta-blocker or rate-limiting calcium-channel blocker is often considered for AF uncontrolled with a single agent.
• p. 61 - During rest the combination of beta-blockers with digoxin was more effective than betablockers alone for the control of heart rate.154,161 The combination of calcium antagonists with digoxin was more effective than calcium antagonists alone for the control of heart rate both during normal activities and rest, as well as during exercise.154,156,159
• p. 61 - R23 In patients with permanent AF, who need treatment for rate control:

beta-blockers or rate-limiting calcium antagonists should be the preferred initial monotherapy in all patients A
digoxin should only be considered as monotherapy in predominately sedentary patients. D(GPP)
R24 In patients with permanent AF where monotherapy is inadequate: to control the heart rate only during normal activities, beta-blockers or rate-limiting calcium antagonists should be given with digoxin B
to control the heart rate during both normal activities and exercise, rate-limiting calcium antagonists should be given with digoxin. B

Expansion of the universe and farther away objects moving faster away

For simplicity, consider the universe as an expanding 3-dimensional hypersphere with radius r(t) in a 4-dimensional space. The distance s between two points would be measured along a great circle of the hypersphere and would be given by the radius r(t) times the angle θ in radians that is subtended by the arc between the two points.

$s=r(t)\ \theta$

If the radius of the universe was expanding at a rate linear in t,

$r(t)=r_{0}+v_{0}\ t$     with constants r₀ and v₀,

then the two points would be moving away from each other at a constant velocity

$v={\frac {ds}{dt}}=v_{0}\ \theta$ .

Note that the velocity depends on the angular separation θ between the two points, so that at any particular time, points farther away from each other are moving away from each other faster than points that are closer to each other. However, note that θ is constant for two given points and that the points are moving away from each other only because the radius r(t) of the hyperspherical universe is increasing.

Conflict and stress addiction

It seems like there's too much conflict in Wikipedia. Maybe it is partly due to stress addiction. Conflict can be stimulating. And stimulation can be addictive, like a cup of coffee. Conflict in Wikipedia may be due in part to a need for this stimulation.

---

The html for a bullet includes an implicit <br>.     For example, <li>text</li> results in:

text

But this is useful for arbitary indenting with a bullet using, for example, "::::" :

text

---

Test1 Test2

---

Archived version April 20, 2010 ............ [http://www.webcitation.org/5p98LnQ74 Archived version April 20, 2010]

---

    {{dead link}}     {{dead link|date=May 2024}}

    {{Failed verification}}     {{Failed verification|date=May 2024}}

---

{{Talkback|Bob K31416}} results in:

Hello, Bob K31416. You have new messages at Bob K31416's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

{{ec}} displays as (edit conflict)

reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/<IP address>|<IP address>]] to last version by [[User:Example|Example]]

reverted edits by [[User:<username>|<username>]] ([[User talk:<username>|talk]]) to last version by [[User:Example|Example]]

reverted edits by [[User:<username>|<username>]] ([[User talk:<username>|talk]]) to last version by [[Special:Contributions/<IP address>|<IP address>]]

{{subst:unsigned | user name | time, date (UTC)}}
{{[[Template:Unsigned |unsigned]]}} — {{unsigned}}       (for use in edit summaries)

{{subst:unsigned IP | IP | time, date (UTC)}}
{{[[Template:Unsigned IP | unsigned ]]}} — {{unsigned IP}}       (for use in edit summaries)

subpages [9]

The time has come

---

Example Notes

See WP:REFGROUP and WP:REFNEST.

Examples tend to pop up here and there.

(Examples tend to pop up here and there.{{#tag:ref|This is an example note. |group="Note"}} )

(The following list was generated with: <references group="Note" /> )

See Example in Template:Refn for naming notes to use more than once.