User talk:AlbertCahalan

Hello, welcome to Wikibooks.

I saw your requests on my talk page, and came here to reply. Most of the issues you have brought up are due to the Cookbook being a part of the overall Wikibooks project. The link to categories takes you to a list of all the categories used in all wikibooks. Commons has renamed this link to be more clear, perhaps we should as well. Feel free to suggest a change at the staff lounge. The same is true of the recent changes. All the recent changes in the English Wikibooks make it onto that list, and you're correct, random module does in fact take you to any module in the project. The thing all of Wikibooks share is that they are intended to be instructional projects. Other than that, it is quite a diverse project.

Adding "Cookbook" to the front of all pages is needed to keep the different wikibooks from walking all over each other. The Cookbook and the Gardening Book share many titles, so a disambiguation scheeme was implimented early on, and some other books also have conflicting pages (while the Cookbook doesn't have one, lots of books have a Table of Contents, for example). Early on (before I got here) the psudo namespace "Cookbook:" was chosen to be the standard used in the cookbook. Other naming conventions were chosen by other books.

In the past, seperate namespaces were suggested for each book, Help:Namespaces documents the discussion. While I think it is still possible to make "Cookbook:" a full fledged namesapce (which would eliminate the case-sensitivity problem) nothing was ever done about it. Additionally, on the Cookbook's talk page there was some early discussion of splitting the cookbook off to it's own domain, but again, this fizzled. New projects are discussed at Proposals for new projects at Meta.

I hope this helps you understand why the things are the way they are, and might motivate you to make things better. Happy editing, and thanks for all the contributions you've been making, they're great. Gentgeen 01:40, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

PS: to sign a comment, like I did above, just add four tildies { ~ ) to add a link to your user page and a date stamp. Three tildies leaves just your user name, while 5 leaves just a time stamp. Gentgeen

Deletionism
A simple majority does seem overly harsh, but I don't see any reason to up the limit to 85%. I think the policy ought to focus more on reasons for deleting, and setting policies which show when something is not appropriate rather than relying purely on votes. Something like the deletion requests process that Eloquence proposed might work better here than the standard Wikipedia VfD system. For example, if "getting a girl" does not fit the mission of Wikibooks, and already violates the policies of what can be included here, then it ought not matter how many votes it gets on VfD. Angela 19:34, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Question

 * pages with real content sometimes disappear (in clear violation of policy) without even a vote

Your statement interests me. Would you like to cite such an example? Dysprosia 13:08, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I did look into that matter. However, my opinion is that the action taken was not done so in bad faith, for one. Regardless,
 * I need admin rights to even investigate this sort of thing.
 * Not necessarily. You can always ask another administrator to show you copies of deleted content; however in me saying this, I do not intend it to be a discouragement or disincentive for your request for adminship.
 * Thanks Dysprosia 21:11, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Albert, there is nothing saying that pages with content cannot be deleted: Jimbo himself agreed that the infamous Getting a girl "book" should be deleted. (Also, I'm not sure why you are convinced that the deletion of the Human cookbook entry was out of line.) Further, I would appreciate it if you would not slander me on other people's talk pages. We all have different ideas of what the ideal wikibooks would be, but we'll never get their through inuendo and slandering. You don't have to agree with me, but I'd expect anyone nominating himself to be an admin would act in good faith. MShonle 20:45, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bean nomenclature
Hello Albert,

I am always happy to find someone else who prefers standard names!

Personally, I find blackeye more orthographically pleasing than the hyphenated, verbally conjugated form, and I would say the thing is clearly a bean, since I prefer to restrict the word pea to Pisum sativum. However personal preferences aside, I think Black-eyed pea has a strong case for being the standard name because it wins the Google test by a large ratio (77,800 hits over 14,100 for Black-eye pea, 2,810 for Black-eyed bean, and fewer for the other obvious variants), and because that's the title of the Wikipedia article.

On the other hand, cowpea beats all of those names in the Google test. Although the term can be used to include the yardlong bean, the crowder bean, and the catjang, we might consider them interchangeable in the kitchen.

As for the black/turtle/black turtle/black (turtle) bean, I think the question is difficult. Black bean is the familiar term for me, and I believe it is the most common term, but it is unfortunately ambiguous. Besides the small black variety of Phaseolus vulgaris (which I assume is the one we are talking about), it could also be taken to mean (at least) the Chinese fermented black bean (used to make black bean sauce), the Indian black gram, or the black varieties of the soybean or the azuki bean.

Turtle bean is clearly a much less used term, but it is far from unattested. It's commonly given as a synonym, and I believe it is unambiguous. Here are some references:


 * Woodland Foods
 * University of Florida Agricultural Extension
 * BBC Recipe
 * Bean Thinking
 * Botany.com
 * Foodreference.com

Although I acknowledge that it is not a perfect choice, I believe that black turtle bean has the advantages of both unambiguity and understandability, and is the best of the available names.

What do you think?

Regards, Pekinensis 02:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hello Albert,

Thank you for your prompt response, and apologies for my tardy one.

As a philosophical point, I disagree with your criteria for judging which things judge as conflicts and which do not, but I have no strident objection to using the name black bean, assuming a clear explanation of the possible confusions, along with appropriate redirects.

(The conflict would come when a user with a bag from an Asian market, labeled Chinese black beans, tried to find information here, under that name. A black bean soup made this way would likely shock the poor user!  Granted, it's unfortunate that food manufactures, importers and so on are often very casual about names, but I don't have much hope for improvement in this.)

If I understand correctly, we can both live with the names black-eyed pea and black bean, with explanations and redirects as appropriate. If we are in agreement, I am happy to take care of implementing this.

Regards, Pekinensis 23:49, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I hope it doesn't sound like I'm trying to dodge this, but I'd like to wait a little longer until a clearer consensus forms.

In the meantime, what's the page you're trying to move? I can do it for you if you want. Dysprosia 05:13, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. Don't forget to sign your comments in future by using ~ . Dysprosia 00:09, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Cookbook:Bacon Cheese Omelet
Hi AlbertCahalan,

As you requested, the image problem is now fixed. &lt;br clear="all"&gt; is always a useful code to use when you want the next paragraph to start on a completely new line without elapsing into the previous line. Hope this is useful to you :-)  -- Mkn 03:03, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I would refer you to PC World June 05 issue, pg. 110, "Budget Linux PCs..." ;-)--Naryathegreat 23:37, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I would tend to trust a magazine which when commenting on trends on the internet, such as certain types of ads, admits to using them itself or having used them in the past. This kind of honesty seems to lend credibility to their other stories. And, honestly, if that's your attitude I hope you don't trust your coffee maker; it might be biased towards Folgers brand...;-)--Naryathegreat 00:06, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
Sorry for the delay in this response, but there doesn't really seem to be consensus on your adminship, so I won't promote you at the moment. If you have any current needs to delete redirects or whatever, feel free to let me know (might be better to use wikipedia:en:User:TUF-KAT than this one, especially for urgent fixing of mass vandalism and the like). TUF-KAT 03:11, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I can't believe the "almost consensus" just fell apart. Has anyone checked to see if any of them are sock puppets or from suspicious IPs? Anyway, I hope you don't get discouraged and you continue to help the project! I too have a unique personality and it's hard for some people to "figure me out". Please do keep on trying. MShonle 01:59, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Cookbook navigation
I don't know if there's any standard navigation. You say you use "|" to seperate the links. Other pages I see using "|" for links tend to be placed at random with no structure. I used ">" to show that it's a subsection of another page: I didn't know someone else was also trying to standardize the links, so I'll let you get on with it.
 * Cookbook | Index of Ingredients | Basic foodstuffs | Cereal | Corn
 * Cookbook > Index of Ingredients > Basic foodstuffs > Cereal > Corn

-- Mkn 16:18, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Recipe rant
You say that my recipe for Cookbook:Sponge Cake is incorrectly weighted. You are talking patent nonsense.

The recipe is intended to be scalable. It is not feasible to define a fixed weight for the ingredients in this recipe, for the very reasons you explain. The recipe is five generations old (the earliest I have traced it to is my grandmother's grandmother) and has been rigorously and constantly tested over those 140+ years: I have never tasted a better cake. Have you actually tried this recipe?

If the eggs have lost water, the amount of flour, sugar, etc will have been reduced accordingly by this recipe.

Also, your ridiculous 'fact' about most households not possessing a kitchen scale is ludicrous. If I were to define the amount of butter as being 'half a pound' or something like that then the recipe would be thrown off proportions, and also I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people wishing to bake to possess a $5 scale!

goodgerster 19:28, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

wikipedia and wikibooks do not share accont data
I know that; I prefer having people leave messages where I'll see them. You can sign your messages with b:User:AlbertCahalan if you want, or do the reverse of what I did. --SPUI 17:37, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wikistrangeness
copied from User talk:Redlentil


 * I'll jump in here with an answer. The database at wikipedia has been having problems with new pages not showing up immediatly. If the same new page is saved twice, it appears twice on the new pages list, and the servers have also been having problems saving pages but not displaying the results.  As wikibooks is hosted on the same servers, it's likely that the same problems would appear here. Gentgeen 01:37, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wikibooks
I have archived your adminship nomination without promoting you, but I have re-nominated you because it was so close. Please either accept this new nomination or remove it from the page. TUF-KAT 16:48, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Regarding Boit, he nominated himself on Nov. 21, and hasn't received any support (or opposition). I'm interpreting that as a clear lack of consensus and have removed the nomination.  You are free to re-nominate, if you like, but I think six months is plenty of time to get support. TUF-KAT 02:13, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vegans
Yeah, i know i didnt get rid of them all; when i started i didnt realise there were so many. I thought that before i completely change the style of the page i should announce what im doing on the talk page. I'm planning on setting up a new page for a table comparing different products in a table and putting a link to the table at the bottom of the page. The bellman 00:16, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Naming Conventions and Cultural Sensitivity
Thanks for the helpful comment that you made on my talk page when I first started about a week or so ago.

Regarding the discussion on naming conventions... We both agreed that it does not matter what a page is called, as long as the displayed name was consistent within a list. Why then are you insisting of moving the names of the pages I create to all upper case when there is no formal naming convention? I've tried to leave yours alone.

More seriously, you have moved the name of every page that I have created under titles that use my local term for items to Americanisms (I'm a New Zealander) without any discussion on its talk page (I found that quite offensive, and made a comment on the talk pages the first couple of times that you did it). Even though, in every case, I've tried to to provide a redirect from all of the other names that I could think of at the time. Worse, in bake ware, when you moved oven tray to cookie sheet, you removed the link from the contents list to oven tray (making it a virtually orphaned page). You should realise that there is an international audience for this cookbook, and we need to list all of the known terms for items in lists to facilitate use by people from other cultures. Why not just leave the names as they are, and be satisfied that a redirect has been provided from the term that you like to use (if there isn't one, feel free to create it). I have fixed your changes made to the Bake ware section. Cheers, Donovan. 23:10, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Regarding really obscure names (on User_talk:Geocachernemesis)
Yes, oven tray or baking sheet may be less popular terms than cookie sheet, but I've ensured that I've included a reference to other common terms in my articles (e.g., An oven tray (also known as a  baking sheet or cookie sheet) is...). My main concern is that you are moving pages unilaterally, without any prior discussion and consensus on the talk pages, and without any clear mandate to do so (as far as I can see; I'm beginning to sound a bit like the UN ;)). See Talk:Cookbook:Beater where we discuss it after the fact, and Talk:Cookbook:Waffle Maker where I'm surprised that you did it again. Later, I didn't bother to comment again on the individual Talk pages.

On Wikipedia, there are guidelines for handling this kind of problem. There, pages are generally left in the original type of English, because much animosity has been caused by people correcting the spelling on pages in the past (just because they didn't like the way that it looked). I don't think that Google constitutes a majority; we need feedback from real users. You say that my policy of including all of the more obscure terms for an item in the list is cumbersome and annoying for you. That may be so, but as this cookbook is a truly international project, we need to cater to the needs of other cultures too.

As far as capitalization goes, you previously argued that it does not matter how a page is capitalized, as broken links will be made whatever the convention is followed, and the display name can be changed easily in lists. So, it doesn't matter if we agree to disagree. I can continue to use Wikipedias page naming convention, and you can use yours. If you really dislike linking to my page titles, then simply create a page with your favourite format of name, and then redirect it to mine.

I know I'm new to the cookbook, but I have a contribution to make. I know it seems that I'm coming in and fiddling with things in your domain, but I have the same goal, I want to be part of creating a truly useful cookbook. When there are definite written guidelines to follow, I will happily follow them. Cheers, Donovan. 01:23, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I notice that the definite written guidelines were written almost entirely by you, so of course they are going to say what you want them to.;) But, I do think there needs to be some sort of vote to settle the matter once an for all. I'm sure that you will survive the lack of a few capital letters in my page names. BTW, the whole reason I'm creating so many pages, is because I read on Grunt Work that more images were need for ingredients and utensils. So, I'm helping out by adding some.

Yes, I'm quite familiar with American cultural imperialism. It may surprise you to learn that a majority of the world's English speakers don't speak American English (think about India). I'm sure that most American English speakers are intelligent enough to work out how to read an article on the oven tray (when redirected from cookie tray), as it is pointed out that it is the same as a cookie tray at the beginning of the article.

Google is not an administrator for the cookbook, and I don't think that it should be majority rule all of the time. I have simply been saying that it would have been more polite to take the cautious approach and leave the pages I created as they were. As it is, I'm getting a bad first impression of the community here. It feels like it has to be, your way, or no way. Cheers, Donovan. 03:07, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I didn't intend to imply that you had written the guidelines with me in mind. But, the naming section is your work, and appears to be your opinion.

I'm sorry to hear that the administrators have been heavy handed with you. But, a deletion by an administrator is not the same you moving the names of others' pages.

I know an international cookbook seems like too much trouble to you, but I'm willing to give it a go. If you think that the wiki is hostile to Americans, then you should try being in my shoes for a change.

Anyway, I had better get back to adding my photos, otherwise I'll never finish. Cheers, Donovan. 09:00, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Regarding sugar formatting
I'm sorry if my edits were not properly justified. I'm using Mozilla Firefox, and for some reason I was getting huge vertical gaps between sections. I thought that it would be best to use the simplest mark up possible.

I know that it's unconventional to have the images in that order (white then brown), but they look unnatural in the other order (brown then white), the perspective is all wrong (try both combinations for yourself). It doesn't really matter if the images don't match exactly to the sections for such a short list, as they are only there to give a general impression of the topic of the list.

I'm also revisiting some of the pages that I've added images to, and changing their size to the standard thumb size (180px; i.e., by not specifying their width), unless there is a good reason to use a larger version (e.g., a single highly-complex image). This should help to save bandwidth (users can simply click on the thumb for a larger view). Also, if and when Wikimedia changes the standard thumb size in the future, our articles will still look presentable. Cheers, Donovan. 00:35, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm obviously a bit rusty, and I tend to avoid using   . I understood what you were trying to do, but as you see, it looks better with white sugar at the top. Cheers, Donovan. 01:12, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Campfire trout
Oops, I accidentally removed the step that requires bacon. I'll go add it back in. Thanks for finding that. Gentgeen 20:45, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

User:Ivyboy
Hey, thanks for helping to clean up Ivyboy's latest bout of vandalisms - in particular the fact that he usurped my userpage... Well, I'm off to see if that's worth an insta-ban. - Bulbaboy 19:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I've warned the user because it doesn't look like he's been given any real warning on his talk page. I'll watch him carefully (after I'm done sleeping :P) and block him if he continues.  I hope you don't mind giving him a chance before blocking him...it can be very discouraging for new users to get blocked, and he might just be very unfamiliar with the way things work.  I know he/she's being real irritating, but I've found that (in my experience) it's much more helpful in the long run to give some advice on how to edit productively rather than resort to blocking right away.


 * Warm regards, Frazzydee|&#9997; 05:04, 23 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Replied to on your talk page. - Bulbaboy 06:25, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Placenta Recipe
G'day Albert. Sorry for the delay in replying to your request.

An entree for two:

250grams of fresh human placenta (chop into fine strips) 1 onion 2 cloves of garlic, chopped. 1 Tablespoon of olive oil Rosemary Salt Pepper Cumin Rice noodles Red capsicum Shallots

Method: Cook onion in olive oil until is is transparent. Add chopped garlic. Toss in placenta. Cook quickly. Add a dash of fresh rosemary and 1/2 tspoon of cumin. Add a pinch of salt and ground pepper to taste. Place on a bed of rice noodles and garnish with thin slices of red capsicum and shallots.

YUMMY!--203.217.58.148 Maustrauser 14:14, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Healthy/healthful
Thanks for the tip Albert. English is not my native language. Could you sign your post next time? GoodStuff 06:58, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

procps
So I've read in several places that you were involved with "procps" but I never bothered to follow the link; then eventually I realized what it was. So although this isn't the best place for it, here's my personal thanks for your work: Thanks! Kellen T 23:48, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
Please see your section in Requests for adminship. Thanks. - Aya T C 02:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Deleting redirects
When deleting redirects, ensure all backlinks have been updated to the target, otherwise someone will just add it in again.


 * Special:Whatlinkshere/Coookbook:Rosemary

Aya T C 19:52, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Banning users
Hey, since you're an admin, I figure you're one of the best people to bring this up to. Dunno where to post suggestions for banning people, but User:Mofododo and User:Tinkle Toy together uploaded an undesirable image and set it to display on the front page. The image in question is Wikisource.jpg. Nmontague 23:18, 21 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Resolved, user blocked, and damage fixed. You did the right thing in reverting the pictures. You could have also uploaded a non-offensive image over the top of the offensive one. Thanks for helping to fight vandalism on Wikibooks. Geo.T 01:03, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Request for a small rewrite
Hi AlbertCahalan, I hope it's ok to post here.

An expert user added a lot of detail about shells to BSD and Linux, but s/he lost your useful qualitative comments for newbies in the process. Could you look at this, and if possible work your comments into hirs? If you can comment on differentiating the other shells from a newbie perspective, that would be helpful too. Btw, I didn't understand why csh was incompatible or why sh was less-friendly (no backspacing, at all? That's the one that makes me unhappy when logging into a strange shell). Milo 4.252.99.104 08:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

- Bash is well-suited to both interactive use and shell programming. Most BSD distributions use the less-friendly sh for the root account and for scripts, while using the incompatible csh for general interactive use.
 * Bash is the default shell in Linux, and in the MacOS X distribution of BSD.

- + * bash, an extended version of the original sh is the default shell on most Linux operating systems as well as on MacOS X. bash is well- suited to both interactive use and shell programming and is used for both on these systems. Many of these systems link sh to bash. +    + * FreeBSD, NetBSD and DragonFlyBSD default to using csh for root and new users, with pdksh, a completely sh-compatible shell, for use with scripts - linking pdksh to sh. OpenBSD defaults to a modified pdksh which has extended functionality. csh is the default for shell usage because of it's Unix heritage, which traditionally favours csh to other shells. -

Wikibook: C Programming
Thank's for fixing the section on relational and logical operators. Back when I first learned C, expressions such as 10 > 4 were not guaranteed to evaluate to 1. The only guarantee was that they evaluated to some non-zero number, sometimes it would be -1. That's why I was refraining from using 1 as the true value. But my descriptions were certainly unsatisfactory. I'm glad you noticed the omission of the shift operators in the bitwise operator section as well. I knew I was forgetting something. Unlike you, I've got no objection to defining false and true values, but these would be strictly for assigning to variables, not for testing against. Testing against them is asking for problems.

I also noticed you had to tone down some of the editorializing against gotos. I've had to tone the editorializing down in other places as well, like using macros for instance.

I've written much of the section on pointers. Sometimes my descriptions are rather terse and not very clear. You might have something to add in that section too. Of course some of the earlier sections in the book really need some reorganization. Rodney Drenth --71.32.166.119 06:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Editions
You said: ''Teaching any sort of class from a live wiki would be insane. Never mind the bad changes: a really nice reorganization could seriously mess up a sylabus''


 * That's why I think we should make a plan where if books reach a first edition or v1.0 stage we should provide a "stable build" of it. Either a PDF or just some locked pages. I think this would also have other good effects: It would focus book development to reach that first edition goal, instead of contributors spending more time on tangents and less on the core material. Naturally for the cookbook this model wouldn't apply, since making the cookbook is much more like making wikipedia, whereas making a ciriculum book is much more like making a kernel. --MShonle 00:39, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

re: could use some help

 * I've looked at all of them at this point. All have been rv'd except polyparadigm's cheesecake recipe, which I'll ask him to resolve. Kellen T 05:06, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Re:
round here, we...

* sign comments on talk pages with four tilde characters ("~", left of the "!" on a QWERTY keyboard) * use talk pages for talk * don't edit other people's user pages (add a new section to their talk page)

Oops.

* add to the bottom of a talk page

Only if it's a new discussion or issue.

* don't edit other people's comments, excepting signature and indentation repair

which I did not do

* don't move other people's comments, excepting archival (you'd best not attempt it)

Which guess what? It's exactly what I did. I consider most of the content in that wikibook trash and I certainly consider the politics GNU / Linux crap to be trash. I was archiving it.

''In theory I could revert your comment moves without reverting your comments, but your comments were mostly just being rude. Why bother to preserve them? If you think you have a useful and productive comment to make, go ahead. Remember to sign it, with or without an account.''

''Consider this your warning that I might find justification to block you. If I remain unsure, I might request a 3rd party to do that.''

''I suggest that you get an account. Edits from well-known accounts are much more respected, especially when there is a history of useful contributions.''

You're just a brutish lout that doesn't like having it rubbed into his face that you know nothing meaningful about a subject you weighed into. Like a heavy stone dropped into a lake, causing nary a ripple. 24.200.176.92 02:04, 27 October 2005 (UTC)24.200.176.92

My Next Book
I want to start a book on Electrical Communication schemes, and I have laid out a general outline here on my user page. At the moment the outline is pretty extensive, and may even need to be split into 2 different books (analog/digital or systems/networks). My proposed coverage of internet topics will be from a low-level perspective, so i dont step on any toes at the compsci bookshelf, or the computing bookshelf. Also, the section on analog communication schemes needs to be expanded. Anyway, you've always been a good help to me, and i wanted to get your opinion before I put this book into action. --Whiteknight T C E 12:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: Image scaling
I noticed your reversion after I had uploaded a new one fixing a note stem. I'll use scaling in the future..Thanks.

Evolution of Operating Systems Designs
Albert, you simply don't understand the subject matter and I'm convinced you never will. As a result of this, things you add are almost okay until they can be assimilated (unless they're interpretations in which case they're crap and have to be neutralized, like your notion that voice recognition is unworkable) but things you delete all have to be reverted. You simply do not understand. So stop fucking with me and do not delete stuff. I don't enjoy cleaning up the messes you leave behind under the pretense of "fixing" things.

Case in point, Unix file descriptors are low-level, flat and centralized, so they're not a kind of capability but merely examples of a kind of capability I identified. And while adding this redundant example, you deleted a reference to capabilities of a different kind. Great fucking job; a net loss of information.

Oh and Albert? The reason you will never, ever understand OS design is because you are contemptuous of it. This fact is evident in everything you have written, everything you have deleted, everything you have done, from Day 1. And that is precisely why I am contemptuous of you. Not because you are contemptuous of OS design or because you don't understand it. No, it's because you think you do understand it despite being contemptuous of it. But you can't because no one can, and your resistance to that universal truth makes you a knuckle-dragging bonehead. 24.200.176.92 11:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Listen Cahalan you little shithead, I got myself out of your stupid biased book because you dominated it. Now I'm talking about the subject I want to talk about from the perspective that I want to talk about it (it's in the goddamn title of the book) which is a perspective you deliberately claimed was worthless so guess what? Stay the fuck away from it! Do NOT dare to fucking undermine it you asshole. You're trying to subvert a book so that it no longer even matches the title, which is DESIGN, by putting in pejoratives and insults throughout (and I consider dismissing my definition as "academic" to be a pejorative given that the entire book is supposed to be fucking academic). The next step is to just revert your edits in that book sight unseen, which is something I don't think I have ever done but you've reserved yourself a special place in my heart with your deeply insulting, dismissive behaviour. Go to hell Cahalan and stay there. 24.200.176.92 01:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I fully support keeping the subject of the new book in line with the title. I don't however support throwing vicious and unjustified insults at mainstream computing and other wikibooks contributers. In keeping with the new book title it is appropriate to discuss many failed designs, no matter if the failures were technical or business-related. FYI, my career has included a job as a developer of a non-UNIX (no shell, /dev, or fork) real-time distributed OS with a nanokernel. You could probably play buzzword bingo with that. I'm sorry that you find my behavior insulting. How would you feel about my behavior if I were to act more like you do? AlbertCahalan 03:14, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back
Nice to see you around again. Kellen T 10:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Somebody has you on their watchlist. Kellen T 19:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have a new camera. :-) See the Cookbook:Egg Roll page. AlbertCahalan 00:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Reporting Vandalism
I would like to report 80.227.58.7 for vandalising Wikibooks:Book of the month page. I have already reverted the changes.

Beekeeping
Hi! I haven't been on Wikibooks in ages. I just logged back in today and saw your message left in April 2005. Do you still need any help with Beekeeping? If so, just let me know what you'd like to do with the page. -- Mkn 17:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month
I just wanted to let you know that Reverse Engineering is nominated for Collaboration of the Month, and we need a few more votes to get it passed. If we can get that book up onto the main page, i think we can draw alot of contributions for it. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 17:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

General voting rules/Proposal
I want to call the attention of all wikibookians, especially active admins to the discussion about the new voting policy. Wikibooks currently does not have a concrete voting policy in effect, so the adaptation of this policy will potentially create immediate differences in the way business is conducted here. Due to large amounts of discussion, changes, and dissention, there are several versions of this policy being considered:


 * Version 1 Written by User:Whiteknight
 * Version 2 Written by User:Jguk
 * Version 3 User:RobinH's revision of Jguk's version
 * Version 4 Written by User:Kellen
 * Version 5 Whiteknight's Revision of Kellen's Version.

Also, there are additional issues being discussed, such as the inclusion of a "minimum contributions" clause, that will limit users with less then 20 votes from editing. Also, there is a proposed clause that would allow this 20 vote minimum to be raised in response to abuse.

I am sending this same message to all currently active admins. I hope you are able to come in and give your opinions on this matter. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 20:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
Could you do a favor for me? I need an administrator to delete part of the history of The Computer Revolution. Someone vandalised this page and the vandalism has been reverted, but they also vandalised the edit summary, so every time I look at the history of this article I see the word ____ written over and over again. I understand if you don't want to do it, you might not want to if you don't want to look at words like that. Thank you! --24.71.223.148 19:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Your post on User:24.71.223.148‎
Hi Albert,

Actually, we can do that (in fact, I already did it several days ago). It's a multi-step process, but it can be done. -- SB_Johnny | talk 19:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have no idea why that's a red link. I'm referring to this.-- SB_Johnny | talk 19:53, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Pictures
As you can see at the top of this page, "All unlicensed images uploaded to wikibooks before November 1, 2006 will soon be deleted." You have uploaded images and some of them are untagged. You can see them here. Please review them and add appropriate tags. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. --Think Fast 04:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. I didn't mean to be pushy.  The quote about unlicensed images was up at the top of the page when I posted the message, but it has been taken down by now.  This is also what causes the worthless link.  Sorry again. --Think Fast 03:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Acetone peroxide synthesis
I have proposed the acetone peroxide synthesis for deletion. What do you think? Ewen 14:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Cookbook-eggroll-wrapping.ogg image
You uploaded Cookbook-eggroll-wrapping.ogg as a image. It has no copyright status, and cannot be executed because it contains malicious code. Can you please remove it, ASAP!

Wikibooks Issue Guide VfD
The work Issue Guide was tagged for deletion on Wikibooks, your input would be welcomed. --Panic 17:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Cookbook fried fish
You wrote to use "very hot" oil. Exactly what temperature should be used for your recipie?

Ensure
I's just wondring you like to say ensure in your recipes. Do you drink ensure. I do. It's real good. I use it to loose weight

Inactivity
So you're aware, you're up for removal of your adminship due to inactivity. The request will be placed at Meta in one month's time. Thanks for your service; you're welcome to request adminship again if you return to Wikibooks. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 21:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Further Instructions for Interpreting Pictures of LCD Displays
Mr. Cahalan, can you offer more detailed instructions for interpreting pictures taken of LCD screens displaying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Zone_plate_boys.png ? For instance, the caption for the image says to "...locate the innermost non-central set of circles in the large grey zone-plate region. This will inform you about image frequency limits, here expressed as pixels/wave." How do I translate what I see/photograph into hard numbers. Thank you.