Zipf's law is also demonstrated as a 1/f function. Given a set of Zipfian distributed frequencies, sorted from most common to least common, the second most common frequency will occur 1/2 as often as the first. The third most common frequency will occur 1/3 as often as the first. The n^th most common frequency will occur 1/n as often as the first.

Without any qualifications, this would appear to conflict with what the article says later, and yet you did not change those later parts. Michael Hardy 20:28, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

... Also: What does "demonstrated" mean? In mathematics, "demonstrate" is often synonymous with "prove", but that's clearly not what is meant here. Michael Hardy 20:31, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't know that the rest of the article says. It is written in math-speak, not English. I wrote Zipf's own description of a Zipf distribution. If it conflicts with the article then either the article is wrong or Zipf didn't know what he was talking about. Kainaw 19:07, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Reposted:

I know how to use the square brackets to link to another article on Wikipedia, but is it possible to easily link to a definition in the wiki dictionary? There are some words that I feel could use a link for a proper definition, but do not warrant a full wikipedia article. For instance, I wrote an article on urchin when a dictionary entry would suffice. Kainaw 15:09, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

To link to articles on a sister project, you would type [[(sister project):(title name)|(word name)]]. For example, help is done by [[Wiktionary:Help|help]]. Skyler 15:21, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

I wanted to compliment you on your edits/additions to the USA Patriot Act article. It was sorely needed.

Thank you very much. I have no personal interest in the USA PATRIOT Act, but I do have a strong interest in Wikipedia. As it was, the USA PATRIOT Act article was full of misconceptions, misinformation, and general falsehoods. So, I took it upon myself to read the articles linked in the article and try to clean it up a bit. Hopefully the tide will turn and it will turn into a good article. Kainaw 01:11, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tracking vandalism on Wikipedia is difficult. There are methods of tracking the worst vandals, but not those vandals that wipe a page here and there, then go away for a while, then come page and do a little more. So, I've been going to the talk pages for these anonymous IP address accounts and recording the date that they vandalize articles. My idea is that if we all make a habit of this, we can easily see which IP addresses are used for vandalism and which ones are not. Kainaw 12:41, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Howdy. I'd suggest not making threats on Wikipedia, or even posting anything that remotely resembles a threat. It's simply not a good idea. You may want to redact your comments. Also, please remember no personal attacks; this applies to everyone. I know this is frustrating, but you're simply adding fuel to the fire here. android79 00:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I do not feel that my response is a personal threat in any way. Zephram_Stark claimed that I would prefer to kill all vandals and terrorists. I repsonded that I would prefer to kill him for claiming that I would prefer to kill all vandals and terrorists. That is not a threat. Kainaw 00:12, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you didn't read the above closely. Anything even remotely resembling a threat, such as "I would prefer to kill him" is simply not a good idea, whether it's a literal threat or not. android79 01:53, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter. It is obvious that the admins are keen to keep trolls like Zephram around. His input is deemed far more important than mine. Since I am not a troll, I will leave when I am not wanted. Goodbye. Kainaw 13:44, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Believe me, I want just as much as you do to get rid of trolls, but the best thing is to ignore them or deal with them matter-of-factly, not egg them on. You're just giving him what he wants. I was just warning you not to get too far off in the weeds with pseudo-threats and personal attacks, which are far more likely to get you blocked than a weak trolling attempt, which I don't want to see happen to a valuable contributor. A very liberal interpretation of the "blocking for disruption" policy could have been used, but in light of his arbcom case, I chose not to. android79 14:10, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided to copy you in on this comment that I added to Talk:USA PATRIOT Act.

I'm very sad to say that this article is next to useless. Neither the USA Act or USA PATRIOT Act detail the various clauses. There is tantalising detail here about what the Act contained: for instance, it allowed the FBI to employ translators!

I notice that the actual text has ten titles, each with their own important subsections. Hardly any are covered in this article. This makes it impossible for me to evaluate the criticisms levelled at the Act. I find that this is sad, especially in the light of the following sentence (from the article): "According to The Gallup Organization, the public is wary but ignorant about the USA PATRIOT Act." This article doesn't do much at all to assist with informing anyone about the scope of the Act!

Surely we can do better than this?

Ta bu shi da yu 09:40, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The Patriot Act is full of criticisms and disagreements, but looking over the actual document is not easy. A lawyer or someone interested in the legal jargon should take a look at it and summarize the work into clauses and facts people can understand.--Screwball23 ^talk 23:12, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply is on your talk page. Kainaw 13:53, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you help with the article, and I have time, I'll make sure that any ridiculousness is curbed... - Ta bu shi da yu 14:03, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to you, regarding the matter of Earth science and geology [1], further comments would be nice. I do think my analysis is correct. --Friðrik Bragi Dýrfjörð 00:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I replied and explained that ge means "rock and soil". Gaea means "planet Earth". Kainaw 00:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, your help has been of great assistance, I also replied on the Reference Desk again. Thank you again for your patience. --Friðrik Bragi Dýrfjörð 01:35, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to be of help. Kainaw 18:18, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Excellent reply. Top Notch. Where were you 20 years ago, when I was reading man yacc(1)? --Artoftransformation 06:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... 20 years ago was 1985. I was in my bedroom trying to get three Commodore 64's to talk to each other through a homemade 3-way serial port. It never worked that great, but I learned a lot of ways to not do networking. --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you check the noticeboard you'll see they're having issues with the html code today--Hello'from^'SPACE 00:35, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that could be it. That is why I made sure to only say that the HTML was causing an error and not that you were responsible for the bad HTML. --Kainaw ^(talk) 02:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume one of the three was a swordsman's rivalry of some sort, but I'm unable to find any that would qualify. Kudo Suketsune and Sasaki Nobutsuna, Lord Asano and Kira Kozukenosuke Yoshinaka, and who... Any ideas on what Wiki-citizens to ask? Thanks for the help previously! Daemon8666 19:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would look for anime fans. I know of Suketsune/Nobutsuna and Asano/Yoshinaka from old Japanese movies. That is why I wasn't sure I spelled it correctly. Since movies were made about the stories, I figure that some anime has been made also.

Also, keep in mind that a vandetta does not require swordplay. I'm sure many involved something less interesting for film, such as burning down a small village. But, that probably wouldn't be in the top 3.

Another thought: Since Kurosawa was ripped off by so many western films, perhaps something like High Plains Drifter were ripped off from a popular vendetta. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a Christopher who likes the name Chris. Yeltensic42.618 09:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Work with a lot of Russians and Chinese and you will soon get tired of being called Cweez and Clix. Perhaps it isn't the name Chris that I don't like. It is the terribly pronounced variants. --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:53, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I used to have a friend in elementary school who was Russian (actually he was born in the Ukraine, but later lived in Russia before immigrating to the United States), but he had no accent. My uncle-by-marriage is from Hong Kong, and he sometimes slightly mispronounces my name. But anyway, the long form could end up as Cweeztopher or Clixtopher. By the way, it's a good idea to respond on the other person's talkpage, not your own, so that the New Message box lights up. Yeltensic42.618 00:45, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the Reference Desk, you argued against me about atheist religions. I still do disagree, because a belief in god (or gods) is the fundamental of religious ideology. Morality and tradition is different, so I do not view the "faiths" you mentioned as real religions. What I printed to the Reference Desk is below. Please, if you can, a few links would be nice to understand exactly what and why the groups you mentioned can be termed both.

"I don't mean to argue with you, but I still do disagree. Religion is, fundamentally, "A Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. Religion most commonly is an institutionalized system of tradition and spiritual praise for a Divine being or beings." Most people would not disagree with that. If a group praises a god or deity, that is a religion. If they are a sect or are traditional observers of let's say, a red table representative of a group of gods and deities, that is most likely a traditional function of their lives, not a religious one. I don't agree with the idea that an atheist religion can exist because if someone observes religious holidays and even participates in an institutional worship, they are performing a traditional rite, which may be connected to a spiritual meaning or may have been connected to one, but they aren't personally in a religion. They may even identify as that religion by "preference or affiliation", but not by faith, and therefore, not in complete connection. The sect may pray and congregate, but they are not a religion as much as a community and a traditional function. You can argue with me; tell me about the sect you studied, and I'll be willing to see why you think "atheist" and "religion" can come together. In so saying, Flying Spaghetti Monsterism is not exactly a religion as much as a culture and a traditional fad among internet-savvy youth.--Screwball23 talk 23:10, 21 November 2005 (UTC)"

Response is on your talk page. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:40, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at "Religion and American Education" as a separate part of my studies and I saw something that changed what I thought:

"Some religions--the oldest forms of Buddhism and Confucianim, for example--are agnostic about God or the gods, and a good deal of contemporary religion places much less emphasis on belief in God than in tradition, morality, and hwo people live their lives." (Religion and American Education pg. 176)

This settles my thoughts about the subject because intuitively, I would have placed atheism and religion as opposites that couldn't exactly complement each other as a single belief system. I was also taught that Confucianism was more of a tradition or a way or life, but I will let it go. You had it right.--Screwball23 ^talk 01:48, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that right on this topic is a moving target. At one point, if it wasn't Judaism or Christianity, it wasn't religion. Before that, Protestant religions were not considered religions. Perhaps I am just lucky to live in a time when my gut feelings about religion and faith or considered more mainstream. Give it another 50 years and I'll surely be wrong. --Kainaw ^(talk) 13:46, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I was wondering if you would like to participate in my classic rock survey. I'm trying to find the most liked classic rock song. There is more information on my user page. Hope you participate! RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 03:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just responded to your post on my talk page, but I'll repeat it here: Thank you for your kind message, and thanks for splitting the article in the first place and adding the complete list.

— DLJessup (talk) 20:21, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wired News[2], the FBI stated to a Wired news reporter "you're going to have to turn it all over."

I don't have a vested interest in the language either way, as I didn't author that part of the original article, but there is support for the previous wording.

Thanks for taking the time to improve the USA PATRIOT Act controversy article.

Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 01:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for replying on my talk page.

Based on your comment, are you intending to restore the graf about the ACLU countersuit RE: the USA PATRIOT Act ? I was about to transplant it to a separate section on the controversy page, but if you're working on it, I'll leave well enough alone.

The prosecutions subheading was ambiguous, but I believe it was technically accurate, since the Act was being controversially invoked in a prosecution. Namely, mine, which is why I happen to remember it :)

I've avoided making substantial changes to that section due to my involvement, but forgive me nonetheless if I seem to be nitpicking. Your efforts to increase clarity and accuracy in this area are appreciated.

Regards, Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 02:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Got your reply shortly after reintroducing the ACLU graf. I reintroduced your edited ACLU text into the transplanted ACLU graf under the "opposition" subhead, and clarified on the article talk page. Leaving the rest of your edits alone.

Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 02:10, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have to head to work now. I noted on the talk page what I'm currently looking for so I can complete what I feel needs to be in the article. Please let me know if you feel I'm missing anything. --Kainaw ^(talk) 02:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a Help desk HoF on my user page. You have the dubious honor of being the first inductee in the Science category. That was hilarious.--◀Puck^talk▶ 23:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I usually get a negative response to my answers. I'm glad to see that someone isn't so serious! --Kainaw ^(talk) 01:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I usually try to be helpful and nice--I do tech support in real life so I know how important it is--but some times they just have it coming to 'em. Other times the set up is just too irresitable.--◀Puck^talk▶ 01:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, do you have a moment to peruse USA PATRIOT Act, Title II? I think we might be well on our way to getting the main article sorted out. I'm a bit nervous about the summary of the sections, would you be able to help me check this bit? - Ta bu shi da yu 10:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will look at it tonight if I have time. Work is finally picking up and I'm spending all day poking around Wikipedia waiting for something to do. --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my response to your comment[here]. ike9898 15:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey... I need some advice and to ask you some questions...I hope you don't mind. first of all... I didn't know that even our MATH (stuff that seems true everywhere, even outside the universe, like 1+1=2)can actually break down some seconds after the BB during it and 'before it' (I'd better say, beyond it, since I guess there's no before it). does our math really break down then? or is it just our physics that do? I'm conffused... also... the advice I need is that I have the bad luck of having been raised a traditional catholic... I have been baptized, have made the 1st comunion and even confirmated when I was 16... but I did because ALL my school does in a group... (yeah I know what you are thinking... I studied in a catholic school) well not really! I have studied in a school that is supposed to be secular...it is secular for peruvian standards... but that means it still is catholic... and I also confirmated because otherwise I'd have had a hell lot of problems with my family... they are more irrational than Kant I'm not even kidding... so I just did it, but when I started to study psychology, I realized I wasn't being true to myself by doing something with which I didn't agree just out of fear and a wish to please my parents and to not be the odd one out ( since most people do confirm, even if they aren't catholic at all inside, and most of them arent! I swear...they think just like me, but are to tyred to defy this freaking tradition and just lead a western lifestyle like I do... I'm not gonna lie and say my parents make me do stupid things or pray all day... I'd have killed myself by now if it was like that... my life is pretty normal...) but they say that 'I'm crazy for going against the current' ...meaning that since the majority is catholic, I'm crazy for not being one! ....hahaa! and ... I'm the nice one! I'm the geek! I'm the one who doesn't smoke nor drink! I'm the rational one! I'm the one who likes sports and music! I'm the one who has a sense of humour and likes to be happy!... and they hate me for that! because, they smoke, they are irrational, they are all emotional and can't control themselves, they are hypocritical, because they too lead a 'secular' lifestyle but go to church on sunday and USE (literally) USE religion to back up their nonsense...whenever they try to give me their nonsense and I dissagree on a rational basis (not that I'm some hippie rebel! I'm a ps. student who is very mature...Iguess)when I do...they always have religion under their sleeve to justify themselves...they go: 'God will punish you' ' god says to honor your parents' ' god doesn't like inquiring minds' 'god blah blah blah' 'our god sucks as much as we do, but you better deal with it'...actually not that one... they would never acknowledge that... but yeah...even my sister has admited to go to church just because like she said it : if I where to tell my dad I didn't want to go, he'd just tell me to F*** off...(I don't go anymore because I have SUFFERED a lot to 'convince' them to accept this...but every once in a while they will get God in the conversation if I'm there, just to bother me, since when I'm not arround, they are normal people Who don't talk about God)... I can't imagine whow would this be if I was gay or something! :| they probably exorcize me... and they have even compared my not accepting their religion with being gay! :|...can you imagine?

I'm really sorry I'm winning and complaining in the talk page of a stranger and wasting your space... but I'm really depressed over this and I think it's taking a toll on my well being... so I just don't know what to do, and I think any kind of sincere advice would be helpful, besides you seem like a really smart level headed person.

ps. thank you for your responses on the reference desk! :D --Cosmic girl 04:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ps. ps. I saw your homepage and I think U rock and I chose the right person to ask for advice...I'm sure you'll understand what I'm going through and feel sorry 4 me ... :( .--Cosmic girl 05:09, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response is at User_talk:Cosmic girl. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kainaw, I had no idea of the level of complexity involved here ... I've no doubt committed a sack full of mortal sins unintentionally. I began to feel uneasy as I looked over the main page a little more and have begun the process for newbies. Gotta say though, even that seems a little daunting to a guy creeping up on 60 with very rudimentary computer experience. Anyway, onward and upward. The search for baseline info on Dick Cheney is underway for me and I'll see how it looks for adding to the article once I've digested what I can find. Chinrest 03:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First time I've ever had welcomers popping out of the woodwork in a new neighborhood ... and with useful info instead of green bean casseroles - it's great. I assume that folks will let you know if you're bugging them too much with questions? Haven't done enough of the sandbox stuff etc. to have a laundry list yet, but no doubt will. Thanks for the help Chinrest 16:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I want you to know that I wasn't reverting your edit to RD:Science. After your comment on Pluto (according to the edit summary), the page went missing. The history was still there, but clicking on your edit came up with a "page not in database" error. I clicked on the previous edit and it came up. So, I saved that version in hopes that it would fix the page. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had figured that much - no worries! I think the Wikipedia database was having a really bad day. Thanks for letting me know, though :) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 19:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello because I don't think we've met before. Anyway, in reviewing you edit at MH where you say "currently featured on the television show" I think needs to be slightly reworded so as to outlast the Deal or No Deal show. See what you can think of to fix the temporal issue. Thanks,  :-) --hydnjo talk 20:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Kainaw ^(talk) 21:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well that was quick. Thanks, hydnjo talk 21:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Redirect#How_to_make_a_redirect for how to make a redirect properly. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. -- King of Hearts ^talk 03:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I always forget to link my redirects. Before I could click Edit to fix it, you already did. Man, you are fast! --Kainaw ^(talk) 00:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to say that, yes, I'm in a dangerously constructive mood.

This can't be good.

I need to go out and bash something to regain my balance, and make sure it doesn't happen again... ;) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 23:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Your answer was great. The question was terrible. I've often considered replying with something along the lines of, "You are absolutely correct. It is easier explain when you realize that science is based on numbers and numbers do not exist. So, science does not exist. Therefore, all of science is wrong and anything created by science, such as automibiles, medicines, and human DNA, does not exist either. All in all, it is rather obvious that humans absolutely did not come from monkeys. They came from hedgehogs." --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a pretty good one - tee hee hee! :) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 09:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"no different than Americans failing to comprehend a kilometer and gawking at fields covered with green instead of cement"

I'm not sure where you're from, but you might consider visiting any one of the western United States.

That comment alone doesn't make you a troll, but your generally unhelpful and negative tone at the Reference Desk does. I've heard you kick out some good answers, try sticking to that.

My comment is factual and it was in context. The context was an attempt to poke fun at dumb Africans who can't comprehend distance. Well, it is a fact that most Americans cannot comprehend a kilometer and most Americans do stand and gawk at the unpaved countryside. If you don't like facts, stay away from the Reference Desk. As for being a troll - learn what a troll is. A person who doesn't sit idly and let people make stereotypical comments about Africans, Chinese, Mexicans... does not make one a troll. --Kainaw ^(talk) 18:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#City.2FVillage_inquiry
Please don't bite the newcomers — ßottesiηi ^{Tell me what's up} 21:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]