User talk:Rurik: Difference between revisions
Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
Rurik, I removed the discussion we were having regarding Vuze. I honestly thought the site would be of sufficient value to readers with strong software engineering backgrounds that it would be appropriate to provide a link to it. However, your policies are what they are. It is pointless to battle with you over them.[[User:Softwaresavant|Softwaresavant]] ([[User talk:Softwaresavant|talk]]) 03:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC) |
Rurik, I removed the discussion we were having regarding Vuze. I honestly thought the site would be of sufficient value to readers with strong software engineering backgrounds that it would be appropriate to provide a link to it. However, your policies are what they are. It is pointless to battle with you over them.[[User:Softwaresavant|Softwaresavant]] ([[User talk:Softwaresavant|talk]]) 03:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
:Softwaresavant, I'm sorry that the edits occurred this way, but it is to protect Wikipedia from commercial interests. I'm simply an editor here and try to keep the content neutral based upon the rules and guidelines. If you would like a second opinion, feel free to use the [[WP:EA|Editor Assistance]] to have someone else verify the contents and determine if it is appropriate to the article and, if so, how to best implement it into the text. If another editor intervenes, I will avoid further edits. [[User:Rurik|Rurik]] ([[User talk:Rurik#top|talk]]) 04:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC) |
:Softwaresavant, I'm sorry that the edits occurred this way, but it is to protect Wikipedia from commercial interests. I'm simply an editor here and try to keep the content neutral based upon the rules and guidelines. If you would like a second opinion, feel free to use the [[WP:EA|Editor Assistance]] to have someone else verify the contents and determine if it is appropriate to the article and, if so, how to best implement it into the text. If another editor intervenes, I will avoid further edits. [[User:Rurik|Rurik]] ([[User talk:Rurik#top|talk]]) 04:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
:: I would like to continue the discussion here - rather on the more public pages. Let me tell you a little about my background. I'm the CEO of TSRI. My company core line of business is infomation system modernization. We have modernized information systems such as the European Air Traffic Control System, Milstar, etc with a 100% automation levels. The same technology used in our modernization projects is being used to document 100s of open source information systems. We have already generated documentation for more 50,000,000 lines of open source code for 200 of the most popular systems. Our goal is to document all the most widely used open source software systems. The absence of publicly available high quality documentation and software quality assurance metrics for open source software projects is a very serious problem - a problem which Gartner Group has identified as one of the biggest obstacles impeding open source software adoption. The site is free. Users are premitted 7-days of completely free access to any 'full' portal. It is like checking a book out of the library. Return it within 7-days and there is no fee. We grant complete and unlimted access to the lite version - which gives the user access to structure charts and hypertext of the code and a google-like search engine. The site is an unparalleled resource for the world's open source software developers and users. It seems reasonable to allow |
:: I would like to continue the discussion here - rather on the more public pages. Let me tell you a little about my background. I'm the CEO of TSRI. My company core line of business is infomation system modernization. We have modernized information systems such as the European Air Traffic Control System, Milstar, etc with a 100% automation levels. The same technology used in our modernization projects is being used to document 100s of open source information systems. We have already generated documentation for more 50,000,000 lines of open source code for 200 of the most popular systems. Our goal is to document all the most widely used open source software systems. The absence of publicly available high quality documentation and software quality assurance metrics for open source software projects is a very serious problem - a problem which Gartner Group has identified as one of the biggest obstacles impeding open source software adoption. The site is free. Users are premitted 7-days of completely free access to any 'full' portal. It is like checking a book out of the library. Return it within 7-days and there is no fee. We grant complete and unlimted access to the lite version - which gives the user access to structure charts and hypertext of the code and a google-like search engine. The site is an unparalleled resource for the world's open source software developers and users. It seems reasonable to allow links to it from wikipedia pages. |
Revision as of 05:01, 11 February 2009
Home | Talk | Contribs | Edit Count | Sandbox |
This is Rurik's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Rurik, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -SCEhardT 03:08, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi. The forensicswiki.org is different from the Saunderson wiki. Please don't revert the dit.
Thank you for your message, but I believed that it is misdirected at the wrong person. I did not revert any edits dealing with those links, and I do heartily agree that both forensicswiki.org and forensicswiki.com be represented. Rurik 01:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the correction on this page - Belcamp is certainly closer to Aberdeen than Edgewood. But now that I look more closely (and as I recall the area from my youth), Perryman is even closer - 4.4 miles vs. 4.9 miles. Any objection to my making the change? Thanks --Joe Sperrazza (talk) 23:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! Want to work on some article(s) together? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavel T (talk • contribs) 16:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Edit summaries
Since the user in question has demonstrated an apparent hostility (if that's not too strong a word) to Custom car, is evidently of the belief any edits from me somehow constitute a claim of "ownership", has effectively suggested any adds from me are grounds for suicide, & has been really mature when he doesn't get his way, I don't feel too inclined to give him the rope to do the same again. Nevertheless, I'm done. If the pix get deleted, you will know who to give the "credit" to. TREKphiler hit me ♠ 12:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm coming to realize it was petty of me. I guess I was taking it personally. (I couldn't see any other reason, & he didn't seem inclined to offer one.) I wrote off Custom car as a lost cause, based on the response I got from the majority (judge by the talk page for yourself); I'm making no further effort on it. If you're inclined to fix it, tho, once the protect is lifted, I can offer some prelim work I did. TREKphiler hit me ♠ 21:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Twenty-Fourth Air Force article
Rurik, The twenty-fourth Air Force article says "when activated, it is planned to inherit the lineage, history and heraldry of the Air Force Communications Agency." I believe this to be incorrect, do you have a source for this? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Switty23 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- This was an item added long ago in the article [1]. I believe that with the recent decisions, this no longer holds true. At least, it should be removed until it can be rejustified. Copying this to your talk page, too. Rurik (talk) 17:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Rurik! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Switty23 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thanks for your help cleaning up the list! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tingrin87 (talk • contribs) 01:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
FireGPG
I agree with your removal of the FireGPG from the List of Firefox extensions. I found it surprising that the AfD would recommend merging an extension deemed not notable enough for its own article into that list. C'est la vie. --ZimZalaBim talk 15:26, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Regarding Vuze
Rurik, I removed the discussion we were having regarding Vuze. I honestly thought the site would be of sufficient value to readers with strong software engineering backgrounds that it would be appropriate to provide a link to it. However, your policies are what they are. It is pointless to battle with you over them.Softwaresavant (talk) 03:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Softwaresavant, I'm sorry that the edits occurred this way, but it is to protect Wikipedia from commercial interests. I'm simply an editor here and try to keep the content neutral based upon the rules and guidelines. If you would like a second opinion, feel free to use the Editor Assistance to have someone else verify the contents and determine if it is appropriate to the article and, if so, how to best implement it into the text. If another editor intervenes, I will avoid further edits. Rurik (talk) 04:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- I would like to continue the discussion here - rather on the more public pages. Let me tell you a little about my background. I'm the CEO of TSRI. My company core line of business is infomation system modernization. We have modernized information systems such as the European Air Traffic Control System, Milstar, etc with a 100% automation levels. The same technology used in our modernization projects is being used to document 100s of open source information systems. We have already generated documentation for more 50,000,000 lines of open source code for 200 of the most popular systems. Our goal is to document all the most widely used open source software systems. The absence of publicly available high quality documentation and software quality assurance metrics for open source software projects is a very serious problem - a problem which Gartner Group has identified as one of the biggest obstacles impeding open source software adoption. The site is free. Users are premitted 7-days of completely free access to any 'full' portal. It is like checking a book out of the library. Return it within 7-days and there is no fee. We grant complete and unlimted access to the lite version - which gives the user access to structure charts and hypertext of the code and a google-like search engine. The site is an unparalleled resource for the world's open source software developers and users. It seems reasonable to allow links to it from wikipedia pages.