![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/DVdm. Don't say that you were not warned. --EMS | Talk 02:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
It seems that the rfc was deleted due to lack of endorsement. DVdm 09:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi DVdm,
my apologies for the babylonian confusion on the Twin paradox talk page.
I copy and paste from the Twin paradox Talk page:
All along, my assumption was that Geometer was using the turn of phrase 'extension of pythagorean theorem' metaphorically.
I have a user subpage with an article about special relativity in which I present the aspects of special relativity that are in my view the essentials. I rely on animations that I have manufactured; the animations are doing the job of presenting the concepts. Please have a look, and tell me whether you think it approaches being sufficient for basic understanding of the physics of special relativity. --Cleonis | Talk 11:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I have been unable to find any clear explanations in your critiques of my suggestions. However, I have found numerous high handed comments that are basically personal attacks such as: "where Geometer clearly demonstrates being able to manipulate equations with squares and square roots, yet having no idea about the physical meanings of the variables in the equations he uses". Please stop these. Geometer 13:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi I saw that you removed a peer-reviewed and cited article from Twin paradox, contrary to WP:V. Probably you overlooked that fact. Also, you motivated it with marginal and erroneous article. Please take note that "erroneous" is only a valid argument if you can cite it as an overwhelmingly held opinion by others. See also my practical suggestion on its Talk page. Harald88 21:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)