RPellessier

This is the talk page for RPellessier . You can click the " " at the top of the page or type [alt- ] to add comments to it.

---

Welcome

I never got a welcome, so I posted this one myself because it has good reference info. RPellessier 20:30, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hello RPellessier and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
• Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
• Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Start of page

Talk page started 11/15/04.

First Message

Keep up the good work! --Dante Alighieri | Talk 07:37, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Cook and Transit of Venus

(These messages refer to the James Cook page.)

I've added some elaboration on the Captain Cook talk page regarding the Venus results, but it will be a little while before I have time to check my references and update the article. Do you have anything about Encke doing the Cook expedition transit reductions in your library? Jeff Medkeff 10:23, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

No, I don't have any decent primary references. This digital excerpt from the Encyclopedia Britannica might suffice: http://www.josef-graef.de/venusdurchgang/vdu4eb.html

(is that the way this is supposed to work? I put my reply on my own talk page? This seems clumsy and disjointed; I think my reply should be on the discussion page or on your talk page, but then how would we email-reply-adapted-Attention Deficit-Disorder types follow the conversation?) RPellessier 02:45, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

AFAIK, we should carry out the discussion on one person's talk page, and the other person should add that page to their watchlist to keep track of what is happening.

Still hoping someone will jump in on the Cook article, but probably I shouldn't hold my breath. Jeff Medkeff 08:50, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

The fellow who showed me how to tweak my talkpage signature confirms that these discussions should be on a single page.

I might get some Cook research done this weekend. Have you seen his statue downtown? There is a geocache nearby. RPellessier | (Talk) 10:17, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Never noticed the Cook statue; I really need to take some time to do the touristy things around here. I might be able to spend some time wading through books Sunday after the Cook details. Jeff Medkeff | Talk 12:10, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

Ask Joyce about the Horsedrawn Carriage Tour. I don't think she drives 2 tons of horses anymore, but she can probably recite the tour from memory. RPellessier | (Talk) 03:07, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Can you give Ruger PC9 GR a look?

Ruger PC9 GR

Is this legit? If so, can you tidy up and throw in some categories etc.? If not, it needs to be VfDd. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 02:02, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

I know a little about shotguns, but nearly nothing about pistols and rifles. I'll ask around though, and send edit requests to some collaborators. As to the article, there's not much "there" there, is there? One statement concerning parentage seemed incorrect. I left comments on a new talk page for the article. I've never added categories before, care to coach me? I can also add lots of links to this article, but let's give the author a chance to do something first. RPellessier | (Talk) 05:40, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it. I don't own a Ruger Police Carbine, but I do have a Mini-14 and a couple of 10/22s, and I have handled the PC9 and PC40. scot 22:28, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Very nice job on the Ruger Police Carbine article. Thanks.

No problem. Check out the 10/22 page, too. I updated it, added info, and engaged in a bit of narcissism by proxy by posting pictures of my 10/22s. scot 03:16, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I did that, and also the Carbine page. You do good work!

Based on the number of typos in the 10/22 page, I also can't type worth a darn if I don't have a compiler to syntax check... scot 05:11, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Not really a problem though is it? There is writing and then there is spellchecking. One is an art, the other is just a mechanical task, suitable for a machine. If I could trade some of the spellchecking ability for more of the writing ability, I wouldn't have any spellchecking ability left. Keep those typos coming, I bet I can fix them faster than you write them!

I forsee a potentially highly emotional exchange popping up over at terminal ballistics. I think I can prove my point using the other author's own statements, but just in case a referee is needed, I'd appreciate it if you'd keep an eye out. According to my wife, one of my favorite debate strategies is to goad the other person into making an irrational or unprovable emotional statement and then claiming victory, and that doesn't go over well. She usually just backhands me as a rebuttal, but that won't really work in this case... scot 15:30, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm not qualified in that subject. I read the article and the talk page, and then I read the stopping power article, which seems to have more to do with momentum than power. If the whole thing boils down to energy transfer versus momentum transfer, then the two of you should just agree to put both explanations in the terminal ballistics article and offer both examples. Use a phrase such as, "some believe energy_transfer is the dominant factor in wounding, others subscribe to the stopping power point of view." Each of you can write the opposing examples, which should stand on their own logic; i.e. avoid demeaning the other position. I haven't a clue as to whether your position has more merit than the other position, but your writing style is 'more wikier' and less manifesto-ish! By the way, I'd solve this physics problem using energy, but I use slugs in my bear gun.

African lake

The great thing about Wikipedia is that it doesn't matter terribly much that you choose the "right" title to start with. First of all, the article could always evolve past the original conception. Second of all, the ease of page-moving makes it so that it's very simple to "correct" the title of an article. I'd title the article after the lake, and then just have the main section deal with the incident. You can always throw in nice geographical facts, and link to local cities and regions, etc. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 09:41, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

History of Alaska

Hi, I've been working on History of Alaska, and I've nominated it to be a featured article at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Alaska. It's only five days old, so someone objected, and said he would only change or withdraw his vote if an Alaskan says it's all right. I noticed that you lived in Anchorage, so could you please help me out? Toothpaste 23:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Game management

I'd love to see some things about game management and wolves added. However, I'd rather see it added to Wolf hunting. I redirected Wolf hunting controversy to there, because it's a bit redundant having both, and Wolf hunting was the better article IMO. Friday (talk) 05:13, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Me too, but I'm not qualified to write it. I'll see if I can come up with an objective description of predator control. RPellessier | (Talk) 05:53, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Cartridge data project

You're one of the people I've noticed editing cartridge articles, so I'd like to invite you to join a discussion on creating a template for cartridge data, and generating tables for a large list of popular cartridges. The discssion started due to a comment here:

Talk:.50_BMG

and has been continued here:

User_talk:Avriette#Cartridge_load_data_for_cartridge_template

If you have any comments, or would be willing to contribute data, please join in. If you know of other Wikipedians with a knowledge of cartrdiges, by all means copy this to them as well. scot 16:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

This has been updated! I've made a template. It's kind of buggy so far, but I think we're close to something workable that I can autogenerate data for. Avriette 23:34, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

More cartridge template experiments

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fluzwup#Template_experiment and down. Avriette managed to catch me in mid-creation, and apparently thinks not everyone has a 1600x1200 pixel screen. I suppose he might have a point--at work I have TWO 1600x1200 screens :) scot 01:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Inertia action

I've done a bit of rewording (OK, maybe a lot of rewording) and hopefully made the operation a bit clearer. One more suggestion, maybe move this to "Inertia operated" to fit better with "recoil operated" and "gas operated" terms? scot 20:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Any name is fine with me. I agree that the other recoil operated articles are a bit of a mess. I was thinking of actions when I named this. RPellessier | Talk 23:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey, while we're at it, do we want to go ahead and merge the inertia operation into the recoil operation article? It's not very long, and as long as I'm explaining short and long recoil, why not explain all three in one place? I'm going to leave the inertia operation section a stub pointing to the intertia action article until we discuss. scot

Merge away! RPellessier | Talk 16:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. scot 17:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Remington 870

Take a look at the recent history for this article. Unfortunately some nitwit went and stole the article from another site. I've taken all the foreign content out of the article, and all that remains is a stub and an image. Do you have experience with this weapon? I myself own one, but I don't know a whole lot about it. Do you think you could expand on it? Avriette 06:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with it, but it isn't exactly exciting, is it? "This is a great gun, can also be used as a paddle." Action fans might prefer a description of the sliding ramp under the bolt that provides lockup, and how lockup is required before the hammer can strike the pin. Some semiauto's use the same style bolt. I don't remember if this lockup was an 870 innovation or just copied from an older design, but it is extremely reliable and safe. I'd want to have an 870 in my hands again before editing this article, and unfortunately I don't own one. RPellessier | Talk 17:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Condensed ballistics screen scrapes

I've made a pass at prettifying and condensing the load data Avriette scraped off Hodgdon's website, it's on my talk page. scot 20:58, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Bouré/Bourré Merge

Hey, RPellesier. I've merged most of the unique stuff from your Bourré article (sans éthe No-Lo stuff, which I've never seen) into the Bouré article I wrote. Please check it out and tell me what you think, if you think it needs more tweaking, and so on. I'd love to be able to take my webpage out of the resources list, but it's /still/ the only damn website on the 'net that gives half-decent (if that) rules for Bouré. Wah. Anyhow, let me know. Phil Bordelon 01:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I have done the merge. Thanks for the approval. I tweaked the wording of the sentence you didn't like; let me know what you think. Phil Bordelon 04:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

United States v. The Amistad

What should be done with this now blank page? It looks like redirecting to Amistad (case) might be the most sensible thing, but you seemed to be trying to reorganize things so I thought I'd ask. --Jasonuhl 02:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

If I could, I would have done it the other way. The Amistad (case) page should be MOVEd to United States v. The Amistad, and then the Amistad (case) page should be retired. The title of this page is quite descriptive, and I would have preserved it if I could. But Wikipedia balked when I tried to do that, and it said something about lacking admin privileges. RPellessier | Talk 02:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

L' Amitie

After you mentioned it several months ago I've finally got round to expanding the L' Amitie article, included a few categories and some links. It's still somewhat stubby, but not quite a stub. Geeman 22:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Surplus killing

Wow, that's a first, a Wikipedia article where the references list is longer than the article :). The article does look good, though it could probably use a bit of expanding and formatting to make it flow better.

I am aware of the phenomenon--housecats often kill small animals just because they're there, and may or may not eat them afterwards (nothing like having your cat give you a "gift" of a still twitching mouse). Someone will probably take offense and tag it POV because there seems to be a fairly common view that humans are the only species that kills for enjoyment, or overuses environmental resources, or overpopulates, or other such things that make humans in some way "unnatural". This is of course a complete fabrication, as animals do exhaust resources in their environment (and then die off in the resulting famine), they do overpopulate, they do overuse resources, and they even pollute--a bunch of Canada geese stopping by a local lake here one year put so much feces in the water the lake was shut down as unsafe. And of course most species driven to extinction are the result of another species depriving them of resources, and there are probably even cases of overpredation resulting in the extinction of the prey species. The only difference between animals and humans is that humans do these things much faster and on a larger scale, because we've rejected natural selection as a means of advancing and started using our brains to expand our abilities... scot 15:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Starting to look at the references: "A Slaughter of Mice by Common Crows." Does this have anything to do with the expression "A murder of crows"? scot 15:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

re: Baptists

I'm not seeing anything amiss... but that doesn't mean it's not there. ;) If you have a screenshot, I could see if you're seeing something different than I am. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 07:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedians Who Are Cajuns

Hi! Seeing your comments on the Polycarp entry, and seeing your French last name, I thought you might be a Cajun and if so might be interested in adding this tag to your user page:

[[Category:Wikipedians who are Cajuns|RPellessier]]

So far I'm the only member of this group!

There is also this group:

[[Category:WikiProject Louisiana members|RPellessier]]

Which you can join even if you are in Alaska!

Sincerely,

--Skb8721 14:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

ohai

im in ur base editing ur page

LisaBoucher (talk) 08:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

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) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (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) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)