Miscellaneous desk
< February 15	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 17 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 16[edit]

references[edit]

````Hello, I submitted a Wikipedia page regarding Mr. Mir Abdolreza Daryabeigi' biography, It was rejected. I included all references. What kind of references are looking for so I can provide them. I am really disappointed why he was not accepted. There are painters of his time period with same kind of information were accepted. I am trying to gather more information through archives.- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrezd (talk • contribs) 02:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The notices already on Mirrezd's talk page answer the question better than we can do here, and indicate where to discuss it further. —Tamfang (talk) 06:04, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Format[edit]

A while back it seems to me you addressed the format issue and the fact many, in fact, very many articles are getting very long and directed specifically at "experts" and the already well read, rather than common knowledge and common information seekers.

Qualifying as a unique expert in very few fields, I would comment too many subjects are still so, and consequently not too useful. I find myself looking else where.

You might limit your experts to addressing and writing a common knowledge brief first, before allowing them to write their masters thesis on the subject.

Roger A. Newman (talk) 03:07, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's your question? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This point has recently been raised at WP:VPI#Required knowledge in articles. The OP may wish to contribute there. Tevildo (talk) 23:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Simple English Wikipedia may become the main version, if this one becomes too complex for the average reader. StuRat (talk) 03:42, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Study in Europe as a visiting student[edit]

Hello. May I ask you a question? I am not a European but I want to study in Europe as a visiting student for one year(undergraduate). Recently I have begun to make my motivation letter, but I have some problem. I know that admissions offices of universities are presumably interested in the extent of directly relevant knowledge and understanding, relevant language proficiency, and credible reassurances from a third party that the applicant is honest and mentally stable. But I wonder if there have been studies of the importance of other factors and/or the persuasiveness of different kinds of argument. (I'm particularly interested in northern European universities.)Hippojunior5 (talk) 04:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do you particularly need to have transferable college credit for these studies? Rather than approaching individual schools, you might first contact the relevant country's Department of Higher Education (in the Ministry of Education) to inquire about admissions standards and requirements for non-nationals. For example, the European institution of higher education may require that a prospective enrollee has attended an equivalent undergraduate program in their country of origin and can provide a transcript of a minimum amount of coursework. -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a current online article from NBC News: Why American students are flocking to Germany - and staying. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can also contact your own institution to see if they have a relationship with a university in Europe. Hack (talk) 03:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DeborahJay, Thank you for your response and sorry for my late reply. Actually, my university has a relationship with some European universities, but I will not apply to them for some reasons. I have already contacted the universities that I want to go to and checked that I am eligible to apply to them and I can get transferable credits there.(I need them.) However, I have never been to the countries of the universities or I'm not familiar with them. So I am worrying that it can make it difficult for me to pass the selection. Do you think that just writing some academic reasons why I want to learn in the universities is enough to make my motivation letter? Hippojunior5 (talk) 06:49, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hack, Thank you for your reply. As I wrote above, I will apply to universities in Europe which do not have a relationship with my university. But I don't have any personal reasons why I choose the universities although I have some academic reasons. I think writing both reasons in my motivation letter is ideal for my success, but what do you think? Hippojunior5 (talk) 07:02, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hippojunior5, I'm a university lecturer in Sweden, and we get quite a lot of students from abroad who have never visited the country and know nothing of the language. If by "academic reasons" you mean that the universities are particularly well known in the academic field you study, that would be a good reason for you to put in your letter. The relevant language proficiency would be English for any overseas student. Most foreign students take Swedish courses while they are here but that is not a requirement to apply. You don't mention which part of the world you're from, but note that if you avoid universities where there is an exchange programme with your own uni, it might mean that you would have to pay tuition fees. (In some countries you'd have to do that anyway. It is difficult to give all-encompassing answers because the systems are different in different countries.) --bonadea contributions talk 07:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

S rank[edit]

Where did the convention of having an "S" rank above an "A" rank come from? This is found in video games. — Melab±1 ☎ 05:15, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The first hit I get on Google for "S rank" looks informative. Of course it's difficult to verify, but the page seems to jibe with my anecdotal knowledge (I'm a big gamer), which is that such ranking systems are most common in Japanese video games. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 07:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that. Einhander was an earlier game that used it that I recall (and that you both should check out if you like 2D shooters :). This thread [1] mentions the speculation that it can be associated with "super" or "special", which is what I've always assumed. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:25, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Japanese thing originating from the anime Rosario + Vampire, in which various monsters are ranked from weakest to strongest, with the S-Class being the strongest. 109.207.58.2 (talk) 18:38, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh, the S rank thing is way way older than Rosario + Vampire. It's in video games from the 1980s. Rosario + Vampire took it from video games, not the other way around. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@71.119.131.184: I completely agree that it is much older than 2004/2008 (!) which is when that manga/anime came out. I'm sure it was around in the 90s (Einhander is a little later than I thought, at 1997), and 80s seems reasonable, but I can't think of any specific game from the 1980s that has S ranks. Can you give an example? I just checked that R-type and Gradius did not have S-ranks, at least in their original versions. SemanticMantis (talk) 15:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

sum of edits[edit]

Likely this belongs in one of those places I never go, but anyway:

Many of my Wikipedia edits are to tighten an article's language (or cut fluff); consequently, it's possible that my net contribution, measured in bytes, is negative! I wonder, has someone made a tool to add up a user's net byte-count in article space, or to count up the plura and minora (that's plural of plus and minus for you non-Latinists) in one's contribution log? —Tamfang (talk) 06:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Plura and minora? I'm reminded of lung membranes and Jewish lampstands. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Edits are typically measured as number of bytes changes, or, in other words, the absolute value of each size change. StuRat (talk) 05:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, really, is that what those green and red numbers mean? I'm asking whether there's an easy way to aggregate these deltas. —Tamfang (talk) 07:01, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I should hope so. While knowing if a particular edit added or removed material is useful, when looking at a person's edit history, knowing the absolute value of all the changes is most important. StuRat (talk) 02:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Airwolf[edit]

[Moved to WP:RD/E ] Tevildo (talk) 08:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]