User talk:Motorfingers

Suggested title: Absoft Fortran Compilers, and go to page with just Absoft in Wikipedia search. -motorfingers- (talk) 15:08, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

There are several placeholders for figures. I find that I cannot upload figures without a live page to link them to. I will add these as soon as the page goes live. If you want to see them, please let me know here, and also how to get them to you. I can post them on my own web space (an unlinked page from my web site) and send you a link, for example. -motorfingers- (talk) 15:16, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Absoft Microsoft FORTRAN for Mac back.png

Thanks for uploading File:Absoft Microsoft FORTRAN for Mac back.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Added Copyright Rationale

I'm new at this and am having trouble identifying an appropriate tag for a box for a commercial product. None of the many tags seem really focused on this type of thing. I forgot that item when I uploaded this particular image.

I followed the instructions once and got another message, possibly from a bot. So, I added a second rationale,

, with the reason being that this was a picture of a box of a commercial product.-motorfingers- (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Absoft Microsoft FORTRAN for Mac back.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Absoft Microsoft FORTRAN for Mac back.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Absoft Project Options.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Absoft Project Options.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Absoft Target Options.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Absoft Target Options.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Absoft Fortran Compilers was accepted

Absoft Fortran Compilers, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Lixxx235 (talk) 04:51, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Motorfingers. You have new messages at Lixxx235's talk page.
Message added 14:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 14:59, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Motorfingers. You have new messages at Lixxx235's talk page.
Message added 15:45, 2 June 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 15:45, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Absoft Microsoft FORTRAN for Mac front.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Absoft Microsoft FORTRAN for Mac front.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:50, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Image of box of commercial product is a Publication???

The problem I think we need to address is that there is NO Wikipedia copyright protocol that is appropriate to photographs of boxes of commercial products. The closest things in the long list of Wikipedia fair use copyright protocols are book covers and album covers, but even those usually prominently feature copyrighted graphics, and only low-resolution recognition-of-the-product images are fair use. But I think that any use of pictures of a box of a commercial product that honors trademark protocols, e.g. no derogatory context, and use only for recognition of the product, is fair use.

Trademark considerations apply to the graphics on the box, the box itself, and to parts of the text, which describes the product (or simply gives superlatives). My position is that the box and its appearance may be trademarked but is not a publication in the sense of a printed article or photograph in a publication or blog. There was never any expectation of charging for use of images of the box, or restriction of images of the box, other than normal trademark protocol. Images on the box should not reproduced in sufficient resolution to be used for any other purpose other than recognition of the box, of course. The only photographic image, a stock photo of a competent-looking guy at a computer terminal, is not reproduced in sufficient detail for any use other than recognizing the box, and associating it with other Microsoft compilers that use that same photo as a sort of logo for boxes for Microsoft Mac compilers of the time.

In the event that you have competent legal opinion that the box of a commercial product is a publication under copyright law and a photograph of the box is a copy, please say that directly so we can address this image from that standpoint. In the event that this turns out to be the case, do already have an inquiry to Absoft on copyright paperwork, if any, with Microsoft, and Absoft provided the box to illustrate their role in the product, writing the software under contract to Microsoft but retaining the copyright. I should hear back from Absoft within a few days. If necessary, I will also ask Microsoft, if I can find someone to ask that can help me. -motorfingers- (talk) 03:21, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Absoft Project Options.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Absoft Project Options.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. TLSuda (talk) 15:10, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Absoft Target Options.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Absoft Target Options.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. TLSuda (talk) 15:11, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Absoft Project Options.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Absoft Project Options.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Absoft Target Options.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Absoft Target Options.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

SIgnature

Hi Motorfingers. I'm sure it's unintentional, but your signature isn't linking to any page in your user space. Would you please fix that? (The relevant guideline wording is at WP:SIGLINK, in case you weren't aware.) Thanks. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 16:31, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Wow, thanks. I did say that I was a very junior editor. Problem: I'm using "Example : Talk" as recommended and the link to my user page is OK but the link to my talk page isn't working. I've tried eliminating the blanks around the colon and using "User_talk" instead of "User talk" with no joy. The "Your existing signature" filed seems to have both fields OK. So, I'm not at all sure that my Talk page link works. -- motorfingers : Talk 20:33, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

The link to my talk page in my signature seems to be OK everywhere except on this page. Apparently the bot doesn't make links to the current page live. -- motorfingers : Talk 23:35, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

I first noticed the issue when you posted at the Village Pump. Your more recent posts seem to be OK, so I guess that whatever it was, it's fixed now. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 04:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Pneumonia deaths in the coronavirus graph

Hi Motor, I believe giving readers some sort of comparison with something similar would help them grasping the numbers. Most of Covid cases as far as I know are ending in complication due to pneumonia. What do you think ? source here Iluvalar (talk) 16:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey, give me a reference and I'll add text on that to the summary plot. Or, if you don't reply, I'll look it up myself. I've heard that seasonal flu deaths are about what we've see so far. But, all this doesn't change anything because we're looking at between 30,000 and 1,500,000 deaths from COVID-19 before we're done. With the first wave. -- motorfingers : Talk 20:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I gave you the CDC source above I rounded the data of the same 4 weeks of 2018. I know Trump really like the sounds of his voice when he hammer in that his excellent measures will save millions of life, but those worst case scenarii are unlikely. Up to 100,000 to 200,000 video at around 4:00. Iluvalar (talk) 21:18, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

EDIT: I love how he says 100'000-200'000 ; worst case scenarios are unlikely and all the media quote him for 200'000 out of context XD. Iluvalar (talk) 21:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

This is consistent with healthdata.org, which predicts 36,000 to 150,000 (expected value 84,000) deaths. I think thats optimistic because elementary estimates of 327 million people, 1% mortality and 50% infection comes to 1.6 million deaths. Uncertainty accrues because the only areas that have even started the pandemic meaningfully are the big port cities; the course of the rest of the country is really unknown. I'm looking at your link now. I'll figure a way to get that in too. -- motorfingers : Talk 22:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

What we seem to witness here is not a logistic curve. It's an exponential growth that suddenly hit a ceiling. We see it simultaneously in spain, italy and USA graphs. This suggest that there was potentially much more cases which were not tested and the growth we were witnessing since past month was our test production growth and not directly the COVID growth which could have happen earlier with a more regular growth rate at least a few weeks if not a few month ahead of us. It would mean more cases then anticipated yet, which would force you to re-estimate the mortality rate down. At least that's how I interpret that sudden ceiling in cases. Iluvalar (talk) 00:46, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I think that what you are saying is well known. All the curves are low except deaths, and perhaps even some deaths are attributed to other diseases or to accidents. This will remain true until testing is commonplace, and that won't happen for a few months yet. By then, the worst will be over. In curves for Spain, Italy, the U.K., and the U.S., you see an unsteadiness in the curves that makes them hard to interpret in detail, and undocumented cases is the most likely cause of that. And, yes, since deaths are more accurate than cases, the mortality may be closer to 1% or even less, while the apparent mortality from the reported numbers is increasing and presently is nearly 2%. Look at the same types of curves for China, and you see huge inaccuracies, quite possibly for the same reason, in part, but the disconnects so huge that it looks like vast numbers of everything are going unreported. We are learning what can be learned from China directly from the Chinese.

Note that I put cumulative mortality on the log plot in the article. I'm going to add a mortality bar chart in the morning for people that don't grok log scales. -- motorfingers : Talk 06:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

After looking at the article, I find that they moved the CDC reporting charts up in the first half of the article; they were at the very end. It that sticks, it means that the senior editors consider it a good contribution to the article. So, my mission is accomplished there. I went ahead and added the bar chart of recovered; it just takes a few seconds to clone a chart and switch the titles and y axis data. The curves for numbers of recovered seems to show that recoveries are reported irregularly in groups, not as they are diagnosed.

It would seem that if you consider the plague cases to originate from multiple areas with somewhat different growth rates, the log scale curves of cases, deaths and cures would be a series of straight lines, each one with slightly larger slope as time progresses. There would be artifacts from things like Spring Break and megachurch meetings in Florida, etc. The deaths and cures would mimic the cases curves with something like a two-week delay, and those two curves would look a lot alike. What we are seeing from the CDC is too bumpy and noisy for that, again showing that we aren't getting full reporting. -- motorfingers : Talk 07:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that's possible anymore. With a R0 of 2 as supposed by some, we need to be close to hitting the real numbers, any other scenarii can be discarded as we would witness piles of corpse in the streets. I don't think USA could lose much more then 10k deaths in a week without noticing. Specially in the context of a world pandemic, I am hopeful it would be noticed. Pneumonia deaths count for 7% of all deaths at this time of the year, I believe if it was over 20% in the past weeks we would have heard about it. So... we are close to hit the data that will allow to estimate the real R0. Wait and see I guess. Iluvalar (talk) 17:34, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

There's no question that we can get the right numbers in a timely fashion in the U.S., but what the data is showing is that we are getting reports of deaths in bits and bunches. When numbers are very small, the laws of probability will show that effect to some extent, and that may be what is happening in communities where there aren't many infections and deaths. That's less important as the numbers get larger, but the "jerky" look of the data continues. -- motorfingers : Talk 17:52, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Ontario tracing a line with their ICU beds on their graph today. [1]. Very similar. I thought you'd like to see it. Iluvalar (talk) 06:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. -- motorfingers : Talk 20:03, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Jackpot ! [2] Iluvalar (talk) 19:13, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

It certainly looks promising. The CDC article that you reference shows that COVID-like illnesses, which they call CLI, and influenza-like illnesses (ILI) have been tracking very closely up until this last week, with a huge spike in both of them in terms of percentage of "emergency department" (ED) visits about a month ago, but ILI's declined and CLIs increased only slightly this last week. Note the similar improvement in new cases and in deaths in the last day or so as shown in the charts in the article. -- motorfingers : Talk 22:32, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thanks for all your work on the COVID articles! Please remember to keep original reasearch analyzing graphs or synthesizing conclusions (such as [3]) out of the article. Thanks again! VQuakr (talk) 20:18, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

OK, I pushed that boundary without realizing it, sorry. I did put back part of one deleted paragraph that refers to CDC data on deaths due to influenza and pneumonia, because this addresses the commonly cited argument that deaths due to the flu dwarf the reported COVID-19 deaths. -- motorfingers : Talk 20:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

No, that's still WP:SYNTH. Feel free to take the contested content to the talk page if you disagree, but don't just restore it. Or, you could find a source that compares influenza and COVID deaths and use that to avoid the synthesis. VQuakr (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I definitely disagree. The reference documents the death rate due to influenza and pneumonia, and that's the point of the sentence., NOT a comparison of the death rates. I reverted the change; if necessary I'll delete the last short sentence that says the data shows COVID-19 death rates exceeding the average flu/pneumonia death rates, because that is an interpretation. -- motorfingers : Talk 21:33, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

The relevant policy says Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. You need a source that compares these two; we don't compare them (directly or by inference) on our own. VQuakr (talk) 21:50, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

So, I should remove "The death rate from COVID-19 exceeded that on March 30 2020." The remaining paragraph, with reference, meets the policy. I would have added the data from the source and put it on the plot, but it isn't readily available; in any case taking the given plots and scaling them to fit in both time axis and magnitude would probably drive the chart to a more powerful template — which would be much more difficult to update. Since others update the data daily, I didn't consider that.

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

DS Alerts

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Jorm (talk) 04:25, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)