Regarding your deletion from the Planet Stories page, I put it in, of course. I started reading Science Fiction and Fantasy during the mid-'60s, when I was in 6th and 7th grade. At the time, while I was reading the magazines, my chief sources for this stuff was paperbacks from Pyramid Books, Ballentine (pre-Del Ray) and Ace--especially Ace Doubles which were the personal responsibility of Donald A. Wollheim. In the 1970s I went to conventions where I met many of these people--including Wollheim who I was by then aware responsible for most of what I read. Mercedes Lackey recently wrote about being a fan of the same generation in an introduction to a collection of Andre Norton's Witch World novels. In it she talks about an understanding of science fantasy which has as little to do with the definition of science fantasy published here as mine has. She makes the point that the Witch World books were sold as Science Fantasy because the publisher (Wollheim) was afraid to publish it as fantasy. Wollheim also published Leigh Brackett's ''The Sword of Rhiannon'' and ''Secret of Sinharat/People of the Taliesman'' from Planet Stories. ''The Sword of Rhiannon'' was originally published as an Ace Double with Robert E. Howard's ''Conan The Conqueror'' (a title Wollheim gave it). They, Robert Cham Gilman (Alfred Coppel)'s ''The Rebel of Rhada'' which unlike them was not published in Planet Stories but was related to Coppel's Planet Stories Work, and Henry Kuttner's novellas from ''Startling Stories'' were all explicitly marketed as science fantasy. There were others but I have never been well-off enough to hang on to my collection. I don't have more verifiable information at my fingertips at the moment I can provide documentation for, and if you want to rephrase what I was saying more clearly, please do.User:Jplatt39 14:29, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC) == voting is good for you == Please vote, I need you. I am qualified to write the new article, but this bad man keeps redirecting it. I need the strength of the people to allow me to do my work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Subtractive_color_space User:Dkroll2 Yes, the bickering should end and resources should focus on just one article. It is not helpful to talk about a "bad man", however, nobody here can see anyone else's qualifications and humility is important, in my opinion. I don't care which one is left, and which one is redirected. User:Notinasnaid 16:15, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC) (P.S. I think that my user page is meant for me to create things to satisfy my vanity, so I have deleted your message there). (nother message moved from my user page) Apples that appear red are not red. measurement devives don't read colors, they read which wavelengths reflect and which absorb a sample. The human being's problem IS VANITY. We interpret reflected visible wavelengths as various "colors" But it is it entirely the egotistical human that believes the color emintates from the sample. It's a hard concept to absorb, I know. But it's true.--User:Dkroll2 04:42, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC) I fully understand the facts that you are interpreting, but I put a different interpretation on them. If colour was a PURELY psychological phenomenon, it would be impossible to measure. But the human eye and brain can be modelled when it comes to colour, so we CAN make machines that measure colour. Colour is not absolute, and it is subjective, but it is NOT purely psychological. And arguing a red apple is not red may go down well in Physics lectures, but it contradicts the way the word is used. I would define a "red object" as "an object whose reflected light is perceived as red". Given my definition, clearly a red apple is red. You might define it differently and have a different answer - definitions are subjective too. User:Notinasnaid 09:23, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC) :Well, that's ''not'' the way the word is used in ordinary English — it embodies a certain theoretical account of a causal process that leads to us experiencing an object as red. Moreover, as an account of redness it fails; think of complementary-colour phenomena, and of pressing one's eyeball for a while and then releasing the pressure (is there a technical term for this?). It also starts by trying to define “red object” and finishes with an appeal to seeing light as red; when I say that a cricket ball is red, I ''don't'' mean that I see the light reflected by it as red. :Note also that redness can't be measured; modelling the brain isn't the same as measuring colour (no matter how loose a notion of “measure” one adopts). (The phenomenology of perception is one of the sticking points of the physicalist account of the mental.) :Oh, and by the way, I agree completely about your comment on the ''1984'' edit; I must admit that when I wrote “an historical” it hadn't occurred to me that it was a question of U.S. ''vs'' British English. Μελ_Ετητης)">User:Mel Etitis 09:41, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) The question of what makes a colour "red" is a deep one, and I think there should be (if there isn't) an article examining the meaning, psychology and semantics of colour. I don't think I could write one. Indeed, I may say I see red when I mean something different. My initial argument was with the statement (of a red apple) "an apple is not red", which I feel is trying to convey something but ignoring the way language is used. In terms of the original article, it has gone now; I don't think it added illumination in its specific area of subtractive colour. You know, I'm less sure now that "an historical" is universally recognised as correct British English. So I will change my rationale to "reverted unexpected change", rewriting (an) history I suppose. I have observed that sometimes people "correct" writing based on a limited grasp of the language. (Maybe we all do.) In an article I contributed to (Publicly funded medicine), I had used "cost" as a transitive verb (e.g. "the changes had to be costed"), and to my surprise several people kept changing it in different ways (e.g. to "the changes had to be cost" or treated as a synonym for "paid for"). Why is that relevant? I think I mean that the original change may simply have been a "hit and run" gut feeling that the English wasn't how the editor would have spoken, rather than based on a deep opinions on English usage. Of course, writers have a responsibility to be understood, so I don't know the right answer. User:Notinasnaid 10:28, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) I've had similar experiences. For example, "artefact" changed to "artifact" (my spelling described as a typo). Off Wikipedia, I once received an angry e-mail from someone complaining that I'd described the ideal approach to philosophy as being "disinterested and dispassionate"; I don't need to explain what they'd imagined those words meant. Μελ_Ετητης)">User:Mel Etitis 11:19, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Cyan == There is a cyan problem on Talk:Cyan that involves something you put on the article itself. Can you try to answer it in detail?? User:Georgia guy 23:32, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) :Thanks, I tried... User:Notinasnaid 08:34, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Color info boxes == You wrote on User talk:Phil Boswell (and incidentally forgot to sign):
vanity
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Notinasnaid:
Notinasnaid
Notinasnaid
Notinasnaid
Regarding your deletion from the Planet Stories page, I put it in, of course. I started reading Science Fiction and Fantasy during the mid-'60s, when I was in 6th and 7th grade. At the time, while I was reading the magazines, my chief sources for this stuff was paperbacks from Pyramid Books, Ballentine (pre-Del Ray) and Ace--especially Ace Doubles which were the personal responsibility of Donald A. Wollheim. In the 1970s I went to conventions where I met many of these people--including Wollheim who I was by then aware responsible for most of what I read. Mercedes Lackey recently wrote about being a fan of the same generation in an introduction to a collection of Andre Norton's Witch World novels. In it she talks about an understanding of science fantasy which has as little to do with the definition of science fantasy published here as mine has. She makes the point that the Witch World books were sold as Science Fantasy because the publisher (Wollheim) was afraid to publish it as fantasy. Wollheim also published Leigh Brackett's ''The Sword of Rhiannon'' and ''Secret of Sinharat/People of the Taliesman'' from Planet Stories. ''The Sword of Rhiannon'' was originally published as an Ace Double with Robert E. Howard's ''Conan The Conqueror'' (a title Wollheim gave it). They, Robert Cham Gilman (Alfred Coppel)'s ''The Rebel of Rhada'' which unlike them was not published in Planet Stories but was related to Coppel's Planet Stories Work, and Henry Kuttner's novellas from ''Startling Stories'' were all explicitly marketed as science fantasy. There were others but I have never been well-off enough to hang on to my collection. I don't have more verifiable information at my fingertips at the moment I can provide documentation for, and if you want to rephrase what I was saying more clearly, please do.User:Jplatt39 14:29, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC) == voting is good for you == Please vote, I need you. I am qualified to write the new article, but this bad man keeps redirecting it. I need the strength of the people to allow me to do my work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Subtractive_color_space User:Dkroll2 Yes, the bickering should end and resources should focus on just one article. It is not helpful to talk about a "bad man", however, nobody here can see anyone else's qualifications and humility is important, in my opinion. I don't care which one is left, and which one is redirected. User:Notinasnaid 16:15, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC) (P.S. I think that my user page is meant for me to create things to satisfy my vanity, so I have deleted your message there). (nother message moved from my user page) Apples that appear red are not red. measurement devives don't read colors, they read which wavelengths reflect and which absorb a sample. The human being's problem IS VANITY. We interpret reflected visible wavelengths as various "colors" But it is it entirely the egotistical human that believes the color emintates from the sample. It's a hard concept to absorb, I know. But it's true.--User:Dkroll2 04:42, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC) I fully understand the facts that you are interpreting, but I put a different interpretation on them. If colour was a PURELY psychological phenomenon, it would be impossible to measure. But the human eye and brain can be modelled when it comes to colour, so we CAN make machines that measure colour. Colour is not absolute, and it is subjective, but it is NOT purely psychological. And arguing a red apple is not red may go down well in Physics lectures, but it contradicts the way the word is used. I would define a "red object" as "an object whose reflected light is perceived as red". Given my definition, clearly a red apple is red. You might define it differently and have a different answer - definitions are subjective too. User:Notinasnaid 09:23, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC) :Well, that's ''not'' the way the word is used in ordinary English — it embodies a certain theoretical account of a causal process that leads to us experiencing an object as red. Moreover, as an account of redness it fails; think of complementary-colour phenomena, and of pressing one's eyeball for a while and then releasing the pressure (is there a technical term for this?). It also starts by trying to define “red object” and finishes with an appeal to seeing light as red; when I say that a cricket ball is red, I ''don't'' mean that I see the light reflected by it as red. :Note also that redness can't be measured; modelling the brain isn't the same as measuring colour (no matter how loose a notion of “measure” one adopts). (The phenomenology of perception is one of the sticking points of the physicalist account of the mental.) :Oh, and by the way, I agree completely about your comment on the ''1984'' edit; I must admit that when I wrote “an historical” it hadn't occurred to me that it was a question of U.S. ''vs'' British English. Μελ_Ετητης)">User:Mel Etitis 09:41, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) The question of what makes a colour "red" is a deep one, and I think there should be (if there isn't) an article examining the meaning, psychology and semantics of colour. I don't think I could write one. Indeed, I may say I see red when I mean something different. My initial argument was with the statement (of a red apple) "an apple is not red", which I feel is trying to convey something but ignoring the way language is used. In terms of the original article, it has gone now; I don't think it added illumination in its specific area of subtractive colour. You know, I'm less sure now that "an historical" is universally recognised as correct British English. So I will change my rationale to "reverted unexpected change", rewriting (an) history I suppose. I have observed that sometimes people "correct" writing based on a limited grasp of the language. (Maybe we all do.) In an article I contributed to (Publicly funded medicine), I had used "cost" as a transitive verb (e.g. "the changes had to be costed"), and to my surprise several people kept changing it in different ways (e.g. to "the changes had to be cost" or treated as a synonym for "paid for"). Why is that relevant? I think I mean that the original change may simply have been a "hit and run" gut feeling that the English wasn't how the editor would have spoken, rather than based on a deep opinions on English usage. Of course, writers have a responsibility to be understood, so I don't know the right answer. User:Notinasnaid 10:28, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) I've had similar experiences. For example, "artefact" changed to "artifact" (my spelling described as a typo). Off Wikipedia, I once received an angry e-mail from someone complaining that I'd described the ideal approach to philosophy as being "disinterested and dispassionate"; I don't need to explain what they'd imagined those words meant. Μελ_Ετητης)">User:Mel Etitis 11:19, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Cyan == There is a cyan problem on Talk:Cyan that involves something you put on the article itself. Can you try to answer it in detail?? User:Georgia guy 23:32, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) :Thanks, I tried... User:Notinasnaid 08:34, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Color info boxes == You wrote on User talk:Phil Boswell (and incidentally forgot to sign):
I thought I'd pop by and mention that your color info boxes are causing some disquiet, with me but others too. I really think the CMYK values in particular should be removed. There was existing talk on Talk:Purple; I also added to Talk:Cyan.I am thoroughly aware of the problem, and indeed have noted it in several places. The best solution is not to shuffle the problem under the electronic carpet but to discuss it openly. I think the likely best solution is to agree on the appropriate range of values to use for Wikipedia articles, and also make sure we agree on the transformation algorithm. I know that some of the articles talk about values between 0 and 1, but I don't think this displays well; also in most places it is the ratio of values which is important, and the scaling is relatively trivial. HTH HAND --User:Phil Boswell | User talk:Phil Boswell 07:11, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
Notinasnaid
vanity
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
N
NA | NB | NC | ND | NE | NF | NG | NH | NI | NJ | NK | NL | NM | NO | NP | NR | NS | NT | NU | NW | NX | NY | NZ |Words begining with Notinasnaid:
Notinasnaid
Notinasnaid
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
