User talk:Howard C. Berkowitz

From Citizendium
Revision as of 11:46, 15 April 2009 by imported>D. Matt Innis (→‎Stopping by to say Hi: new section)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
1, 2, 3, 4

Chiropractic Guidelines

I found one of the links that we were talking about,LBP guidelines. This is the newest version that basically is the evolution of the Mercy Guidelines. There are more - a couple for nonmusculoskeletal conditions that you might be interested in as well. Especially notice the last three or four pages where it talks about treatment frequencies and red flags. Depending on the doctor, he/she can run the tests to help rule in or out those conditions, or can refer them to someone else to do it. When you talk about Integrative medicine from our perspective, it basically means that there is less need for us to do it ourselves. D. Matt Innis 20:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is the current review of the literature for non-NMS conditions for chiropractic care (not just spinal manipulation) which might include other CAM techniques like massage, etc.. I doubt that acupuncture or homeopathy is considered in these though. D. Matt Innis 20:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

You'll like these quotes

Got this from a book review:

Goldacre's prose always reads well and pulls together his thoughts on homoeopathy, nutritionists, Brain Gym, the Aqua Detox footbath and other "bollocks du jour", the publicity for which depends largely on gullible media publishing arrant nonsense, mostly by rehashing "garbage in" press releases into "garbage out" articles; churnalism, not journalism, as Nick Davies puts it."

And the related:

The people who run the media are humanities graduates with little understanding of science, who wear their ignorance as a badge of honour. Secretly, deep down, they perhaps resent the fact that they have denied themselves access to the most significant developments in the history of Western thought from the past 200 years."

Both in an article from the Times Higher Education website. Chris Day 22:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


Approval of AN-

Howard, Eric posted that paragraph we've been waiting for on the AN-1 Talk page. Could you please work that into the article somehow? I have extended the Approval date by one day to Jan. 28 and I will change the version to be approved just as soon as you have worked his material into the article. Thanks, Milton Beychok 09:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

(to be repeated on both our user pages) Milt, as soon as I have ingested a bit more coffee, I shall do so. Not complaining; it wasn't quite what I was expecting. I assumed he was going to explain a bit about it as a terminology example in the specific article context. (i.e., in "TTC-56 (V)1", the first means that it's movable from fixed site to fixed site while the second T means..."). Incorrectly anticipating, I wrote a developing article pn the AN/TTC-56, and also some of the system engineering concepts that don't have AN- designations, such as the Warfighter Information Network–Tactical, into which it fits. I'm going to use his language as more of a case study in AN-, but as a different sort of case study that also explains AN- systems can be components in systems-of-systems.
As an aside here, I'm talking about the general Engineering subspecialty of Systems Engineering, of a military flavor. That raises a question to you: to what extent do modern chemical engineers work with people called systems engineers, who look especially at the control systems, but also, say, the logistical interfaces between the fixed manufacturing plant and transportation engineering? In some respects, I think of systems engineering as something common to all engineering disciplines, but, especially in military context, it is the field of ensuring compatibility among subsystems belonging to different engineering disciplines. While, for example, a mining engineer might look at an oil well, a transportation/civil/mechanical engineer at the means of getting the crude to the refiner, and a chemical engineer at refining it, a system engineer might be looking at the handoffs and interface standards. Many large military development projects are run by systems engineering centers, either government or context. I think there's an article here and may start a stub today, along with some military aspects including "transformation", the conscious movement between generations of interconnected systems.
As yet another aside, as I get more into some of the military systems engineering, I'm going to explore something that might yet be a means of getting support for nonspecialist engineering editors. I do a number of things as what might be called an engineering journalist, so while I might be talking to the "public affairs" arm of a manufacturer or integrator, those people are accustomed to inquiries from the trade press, not general news media, and can be willing to do fact-checking. In many cases, they will do an email response, or sometimes one by phone, but, if for no other reason than to avoid the appearance they are manipulating the article, they don't want that published. Now, for what I'm going to suggest, something of an honor system is involved, which is also one of the reasons I'm hesitant to have instant editors that start ruling without much experience with the CZ process. Hypothetically, if I asked for approval on some military systems engineering, and forwarded either an email from the technical public affairs people, or wrote an email documenting the telephone call and giving point of contact, would that give you more confidence? Wearing my engineering journalist hat, I would consider it completely normal for my publishing-type editor to make random quality calls just to such a point of contact as I mention; I'm literally now hoping to start on a project where I will do a series of specialized computer articles for a broader yet specialized electronics trade magazine, and I'd certainly expect the editor might verify some of my interviews. Howard C. Berkowitz 13:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Howard, my career as a chemical engineer was mostly in the process design of are refineries, petrochemical plants, natural gas processing and power plants. In those areas, systems engineers (by my definition) were non-existent. We had "instrument engineers" (or "instrumentation engineers") who were the experts in how to specify/design/purchase/maintain the plant control systems.
To my understanding, a "systems engineer" establishes work methods and work flow methods to improve worker productivity, especially in work involving repetitive manual operations (i.e., assembly line work, packaging work, bulk clerical filing, etc.). Such engineers just weren't needed in refineries, petrochemical plants, natural gas processing and power plants. (Any systems engineer reading this: please excuse my definition of your work if it is incorrect or too limited.)
As for this question of yours: Hypothetically, if I asked for approval on some military systems engineering, and forwarded either an email from the technical public affairs people, or wrote an email documenting the telephone call and giving point of contact, would that give you more confidence?. Take a look at the Talk page of my Conventional coal-fired power plant article and you will note that I asked a good friend and chemical engineering colleague of mine (who had never heard of Citizendium) to review the article. He did a very thorough job and provided a good number of edits, almost all of which I accepted and implemented. I then documented his review on the article's Talk page and credited his work. Although Paul Wormer had also provided a good review, I still wanted the viewpoint of a fellow chemical engineer whose career had been in the same field as mine and that just wasn't yet to be had in Citizendium. I did not provide a point of contact on the basis that, if anyone asked for it, I would then provide it by personal email (rather than providing it publically on the Talk page).
Has this been of help? Milton Beychok 19:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes. Military systems engineering, however, is very much more than workflow; they deal with process compatibility and interfaces. The term is also widely used in communications engineering; one of my standard textbooks of communications systems engineering tends to focus on both capacity planning and compatibility. You now have me interested in checking engineering school criteria, on how they define systems engineering.
In the short term, at least in Engineering, I suspect we are going to have to use such external reviewers to help the active Editors in the approval process. Luckily, I know just enough about matters related to air pollution and chemical engineering to be dangerous helpful. (One must have context. My air pollution knowledge variously comes from chemical warfare, but also from growing up in northern New Jersey, where we would comment on the strange smell of pure air).
Increasingly, I tend to put communications systems in Engineering, especially things such as classic radio and telephony, but modern ones go into Computers as well. Aviation seems logical enough there; I know a good deal about electronics there, a bit about rocket propulsion, and very little serious aerodynamics.
I still want a train engineer. Choochoo! Howard C. Berkowitz 19:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
By the way, you might find it useful to read Control system, Open loop control, Closed loop control and Control valve. They might give you more insight into what I meant when I wrote above about plant control and what instrument engineers did. Milton Beychok 08:46, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Value of Networks

Howard, I am critiquing the networks article. But before I post anything, I am going to learn more about the CZ structure on article writing. There is a feel, structure and culture within CZ and I want to get a better feel for it. Thanks for the head's up on the article. Good to get started. Oh I am lay on networks within the communications industry. I am looking to see how it feels for someone who wants to learn. Ivan Kelly 14:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


re: Malware

Hi Howard, I wanted to stop by and say thank you for not only giving the Malware article some category sprucing up (I never got that far at the other place), but also taking the time to drop a note on the talk page. To be honest, I kind of expected to come back to find the article either deleted or at least tagged for future deletion. It's so nice to see actual constructive assistance, and I wanted to express my appreciation for that. Ched Davis 05:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

By the way, let me know how the hand warmer training goes, maybe there's hope for a certain dog I know that thinks she belongs in her masters lap when he's trying to computer related things. ;) Ched Davis 05:25, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, OK, I have a couple questions as I get up to speed here, and please forgive the the WP lingo as I adjust.

  1. Should I avoid naming specific products (like Microsoft, Malwarebytes, winfixer, etc.) when writing articles.
  2. Would it be better to fully develop an individual article or two rather than create several stubs. I ask this because I see this thing about Sunday being an encouragement to add to the info here.
  3. Are we allowed to write outside our professions? ... for example, even though I'm in the computer field, am I allowed to write about movies or TV shows?

By the way - that proggie for training the cat to stay off the keyboard was pretty neat .. I enjoyed that link.

Thank you for your patience and guidance, ;) Ched Davis 23:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Almost forgot - should I avoid the "How To" type of information? (ex. How to remove malware) .. Thanks, Ched Davis 23:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Mention products or malware when they illustrate a concept, rather than being a specific how-to on anything current. For example, I discussed smurfs under amplification attack. I might discuss Slammer as an example of a worm and countermeasures. These share the aspect of being well-patched vulnerabilities, and also relatively straightforward to explain.
As far as stub vs. full article, there's no real rule. My advice, when you are starting, is to do several small articles, so it gives you the feel of linking among them, and, when you are ready, doing Metadata, Definitions, and Related Articles.
Sure, write about anything about which you have reasonable knowledge.
Glad to help on this; I'm happy to have some collaborative work, which doesn't depend on being an Editor. Indeed, feel free to look at/edit some of my work. Howard C. Berkowitz 23:35, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


DNS article

Per your request, I will try to review at least the base DNS article. Expect it will take me till the weekend or so.Pat Palmer 18:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Howard, I have started. I know it's going to be difficult for you to allow me to "mess with" your baby, so I beg your patience. It will take me a while to get things settled down in my mind, and I am still in the process of reading the article for the very first time. So, I guess I'm requesting you to hold back until I've made it away into the article, unless you think I'm making a dreadful mistake, in which case, of course you must argue with me :-)Pat Palmer 14:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Asking for your reaction to the revised intro of DNS

Howard, would you please take a look at the revised introduction for DNS? If you agree with the summary that I have got there, then I can use that to shape the rest of the material around the goals stated at the end of the introduction. You have provided such a marvelous wealth of information; I feel that mainly what's needed is hardnosed copy-editing and guiding the whole thing around the goals stated (explaining the mechanics of DNS, and keeping it quite distinct from search engine technology). A simple yes or no will suffice (but if no, then a short reason). Thanks in advance!Pat Palmer 16:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The only things I'd quibble about is TOC placement, and the issue of delayed binding at the beginning. Do remember I don't consider myself a DNS specialist and am not all that emotionally invested; routing and IP would be another matter.
Bluntly, I'm concerned with getting several computers article to the minimum necessary and sufficient level for Approval, at least the top-level articles. It is my hope that might be a stimulus to more participation, if Computers authors are seeing Approvals. Howard C. Berkowitz 19:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Kimchi

That is absolutely fabulous, Mr. Berkowitz! Although I'm a Korean & I eat Kimchi, I don't know much about it!!! I know that garlic, red pepper, green onion, etc. go into it & shrimp Jutgal is another major ingredient (in most Korean kimchi's... although the Chinese food companies have figured out ways to make Kimchi without adding jutgal to reduce production costs & I'm sure the Japanese make "Kimuchi" differently.) Let me work on the article as well! P.S. I also know about "mool kimchi" or "water kimchi" which doesn't contain much red pepper and has a very subtle taste. I heard that Korean food used to not be spicy before red pepper entered the country around the 16th century. (Chunbum Park 21:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC))

It's just impressive that you set out to make Kimchi at home! Kimchi is supposed to be very healthy for you. I'm sure that writing this article will just make you feel better about yourself, the hobby, and the food. (Chunbum Park 21:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC))

Collaboration

I saw your suggestion that the project needs some articles on some higher level topics like Al-Qaeda.

I have gathered some sources for beginning an article on Al-Qaeda. I will follow your style requests, to the best of my ability. I will ask you to try to regard it as a good faith attempt, without regard to how many aspects of it you think fall short of the standards you would like to see here.

I should put up a draft covering its founding after Osama bin Laden split from Abdullah Azzam's group, the group's movement to Sudan, the reports the group's role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, reports of the group's role in the Sudanese pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, the group's return to Afghanistan, its role in the bombing of the USS Cole, its role in the 2001-09-11 bombings -- in the next couple of days.

In my draft I could also begin to address al Qaeda's Afghan training camps, and its post 9-11 expansion as other groups, like Zarqawi's signed on board. I would like to ask you some questions about covering these two subtopics. George Swan 22:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Let's start an article simply to get a talk page, and move this discussion there. My suggestion would be to concentrate, at first, on the group's background and structure, more than its actions, although I offer a pointer to the best guesses as to its structural model, Clandestine cell system#Non-traditional models exemplified by al-Qaeda.
There may be reason to expand the bin Laden entry to get a better tie to Afghanistan as well as the Saudi groups with Azzam. Again in setting the foundation, we'll want to be sure to bring in the background from Sayyid Qutb and the Egyptian foundation groups.
Their theories of restoral of the Caliphate is important, as well as how they are regarded as heretics even by Wahhabis, much less more mainstream Sunnis and especially Shi'as. With the Sudanese tie-in, there's always he who made the Medici look simplistic, [[Hassan al-Turabi]. [[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 00:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Your proposal "Article names for wars and conflicts"

I assigned your proposal "Article names for wars and conflicts" to be decided in first instance by all people that comment on it, following precedence for naming conventions. The Editorial Council has the final say, if they want to vote on it. Please update the proposal record, which you can find on CZ:Proposals/Ad hoc, and fill in the fields for the next step and the target date, so that we know what your plans are with the proposal. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask me. -- The Proposals Manager, Jitse Niesen 14:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Putting "Related Articles" into practice

Howard, you're a big booster of using the Related Articles subpage to organize CZ, so could I ask you a question about putting that into practice? There's been a bit of discussion on CZ Talk:Literature Workgroup about this and was curious about your thoughts on this. For example, there's an artcle on H.G. Wells. When creating a Related Articles subpage for him, what would his "Parent Topics" be? "British literature," "British literature in the English language," "English literature" (i.e., from the country England), and "English-language literature" (which would also include American, Aussie, Trinidadian, etc.) would all work. So would, say, "Science fiction." We have no articles at any of those places but sci-fi; and we have no complete or organized list of subtopics in the top-level Literature article's Related Articles.

In the absence of any consensus for an organizational scheme corresponding to Britannica's "Outline of Knowledge," or any imposed scheme from CZ Editor(s) (which I'm not one of), what do you recommend doing? Let sleeping dogs lie until such a scheme exists? Boldly go ahead and let authors use their common sense and see what emerges from this "widsdom of crowds" I keep hearing about (while hiding behind my copy of "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds")? And, as Chris Day points out, you could put all of those categories as "parent topics" of Wells and "subtopics" of Literature, even if articles are never written for most of them, and the exist only as stand-alone Related Articles subpages; his point is that the more ways you can navigate to H.G. Wells the better.

One concern of mine was that if I started putting "national literatures" as Parent Topics, but then some later Editor or consensus decided we wanted to do it "by language," then all the American and British authors' Related Articles would have to be changed from "American" or "British" to "English-language lit." But Chris's point was that if we just used lots of overlapping categories anyway, that wouldn't be necessary; at worst you'd have to merge the articles on American, British, Aussie, Caribbean, etc., lit. into one article, not change hundreds of Related Articles pages.

Thanks for any recommendations you might have. Bruce M. Tindall 17:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Good questions, to which I don't have a full set of answers. A key point to remember is that a given article can belong to multiple hierarchies. So, there's no reason not to have:
Parent Topics
  • English literature [r]: Literature of the British isles written in English. [e] (HG was English, I believe. Need better disambiguation from language and constituent country)
  • Science fiction [r]: A story-telling genre that presents alternatives to what is currently considered scientifically possible or that extrapolates from present-day knowledge. [e] (His influence was so great I'd call that a parent)
some sort of article on speculative fiction that are seen as at least partially predicting the future
Subtopics
I'm increasing liking the convention of putting "The" in the title, although not sort order, of a book
Related articles
  • Utopia [r]: The name of a fictional society created by Sir Thomas More as a satire on his own, European, society; by extension, it has come to represent all ideal societies, real or imagined. [e]
  • Dystopia [r]: A fictional future society that is severely dysfunctional, and seen as a very bad direction for humanity [e]
I'm not a Wells expert, but this has been interesting! I'm tempted to go borrow a copy of Invisible Man and at least reference it in stealth and start invisibility. Howard C. Berkowitz 18:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Co-opting adjectives for Workgroups and Articles

Howard, I was thinking of other semi-automatic machines/processes and that is why I changed it. Those articles seem specific to firearms, and the disputes over laws concerning them means they should have their own articles. An article about semi-automation or semi-automatic machines or processes would be different, and there will certainly be more such articles. Paying my mortgage or utility bills could be a semi-automatic or fully-automatic process too. I am trying to get people to stop using adjectives in place of nouns for article titles as if the adjective only applied to their particular field. Thus Antiviral--> Antiviral drug. Likewise, Historical Perspective is not a good name for Historical Perspective of Computer Codes. Does this make sense? David E. Volk 18:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Ironclad

Hello Mr. Berkowitz! I'm afraid that Koreans did not invent iron-clad vessels. There is no definite proof that turtle ships were iron-clad, and in fact the Japanese were the first to armor their ships with iron plating (but hold your breath because this is all subjective).

Admiral Yi's diary (nor the official Joseon history) does not mention that turtle ships had iron plating on them. However, 2 main evidence substantiating the theory that turtle ships were iron-clad came from a drawing & a Japanese record. The drawing done about 200 yrs after the war on an apparently grounded turtle ship showed hexagonal plating on the roof, and a Japanese commander claimed the turtle ship was covered with iron, but the iron could refer to iron spikes.

The Japanese during the 1580s seemed to have won a naval battle or 2 with giant ships reinforced and covered with iron, but really it was not much more than the large metal shields on the sides of Greek warships + bad construction (that's the impression I got from researching Korean War of 1592-1598). Probably European man-of-war's & Korean & Chinese ships with cannons & cannonballs carried more iron than the Japanese' iron-clad ships.

I'll add some reference to the "1st ironclad"s in Battle of Hampton Roads later; I lent my book to my history teacher so I can't work on the subject currently. Thank you! (Chunbum Park 04:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC))

Approvals?

I think a number of articles I've worked on, most of which you've been involved in as editor, may be ready for approval. The big ones are cryptography and block cipher. Smaller ones include passive attack and its children Brute force attack, Algebraic attack and Code book attack plus active attack, Man-in-the-middle attack, Meet-in-the-middle attack, birthday attack and Snake oil (cryptography). Should rewrite attack become a separate article, rather than a pointer into stream cipher as it now is? Sandy Harris 01:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

But much, perhaps all, of Block_cipher#Context is too general for that article. It belongs somewhere else, but I'm not certain where.
What about Digital signature, RSA, discrete logarithm, HMAC, Block cipher modes of operation, Diffie-Hellman, ... Are any of them approvable? Sandy Harris 01:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

For active attack, passive attack, Algebraic attack, Code book attack, RSA, discrete logarithm, Hashed message authentication code and Birthday attack history shows me as the only editor, except for a couple of trivial copy edits. Only passive attack and RSA have anything on the talk page. I think most of those could move toward approval, though RSA and discrete log need to have math editor take a look. I've invited two via talk pages, but no response yet.

You did one edit of Man-in-the-middle attack and two for Meet-in-the-middle attack, arguably substantive. For Diffie-Hellman, one that I would say was a copy edit, adding citations & links. I think those might need another editor for approval.

Snake oil (cryptography) may hold the record for the highest ratio of talk page text to article text. I think the current version may be approvable. What's your take on that?

What about the biggies, cryptography and block cipher? I'm certain both could be improved, but are they good enough yet? Sandy Harris 09:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd like editor input on the problem of overly general text in Block_cipher#Context. Most of that needs to move, but where? Some I've already copied into cryptography.
What about the less purely technical articles like Cypherpunk, FreeSWAN and Opportunistic encryption? Are they approvable yet?
IPsec is an important topic and we have a substantial article. I don't think it is done, though. Any suggestions on how it needs to evolve? Sandy Harris 00:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Reminder re your proposal "Article names for wars and conflicts"

Hello. May I please remind you of my message above, dated 11 March, on your proposal "Article names for wars and conflicts". As far as I can see, you haven't yet updated the proposal record on CZ:Proposals/Ad hoc, nor have I seen any sign of activity on the proposal page. If nothing happens within a week, I'll have to assume that you are no longer interested in the proposal and thus remove you as its driver, which will render the proposal inactive. -- The Proposals Manager, Jitse Niesen 11:44, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

civil war

Hi Howard, I'm working on cleaning up the redirects from the American Civil War move and working on the disambiguation page. As a military editor, do you forsee an article simply on "civil war"? If so we can start that article out as a stub and have a link at a top to the disambig. --Todd Coles 00:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll leave it up to your discretion and expertise. I think a separate article at civil war makes more sense, unless we redirect it to the civil war section of insurgency. Currently, searching for either "civil war" or "Civil War" is redirecting to the disambig page. I suppose we could even have something on the disambig page that sends people to the insurgency article. --Todd Coles 01:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Latest emailed question from Landon Blake

Howard, I have asked Landon to move our discussions from now on to his user talk page. It is easier to communicate there than by emails over the CZ Engineering mail list. I also told him that you would reply to his latest question since it concerns your way of starting an article. Please read my response to him on his Talk page at User talk:Landon Blake. Milton Beychok 21:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Since we are now discussing the specific PLSS article, I have copied (not moved) the discussions on Landon's talk page to Talk:Public Land Survey System. Please have a look there at a few questions that I raised. Especially my question about the lemma articles in the Related Links subpage. Regards, Milton Beychok 22:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Pastels

Yes, I guess you have the exact definition. When I read your article I was trying to figure out where these pastels might fit as they were not as soft nor as hard as the ones you described. I decided they might be the harder type though. The thing is we call them just dry pastels here in Brazil (literally from Portuguese) or maybe I just do not know enough about all the types. When I bought these in early seventies we were under military regimen and it is amazing how hard it was to get imported stuff here. Anything! The Generals astronomically taxed anything imported, even when nothing similar was produced here, therefore, very few products ever were imported. Even now we do not have them here. Even books were almost impossible to get. What a set back it was. really bad for the culture and education. Oh well, they are gone for good now!

But answering your question, I like drawing and painting, however I never had a formal study on that, so your article seemed pretty good to me. Having photos would make it much better. As you probably guessed, I do not really use the pastels as they are almost 40 years old seem like just new. Partially it is because I have no time to draw but also I guess I do not like drawing with pastels very much. They are too messy and dirty, lol, all this dust and dirty hands staining the paper... Furthermore I like detailed drawings and this is not the best media to do it. I draw much more with colored pencils and oil painting too. This week I drew an orchid with pencils and the result was really nice (thats why I have not edited CZ for two days). I'll see if I take a photo later and put it on my user page.

I thing your idea of showing the ways they work on a common paper, side by side is super. Do you like drawing too? Dalton Holland Baptista 15:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

The personal experience versus signed articles is an interesting issue. Well, in a certain way all articles are actually signed. I usually check who wrote them. I always thing how easier might be just writing them with few references. I can write large articles from my experience with orchids completely by heart, but then, I have to go all over these books to see where it is the fact reference I need. Cooking is another thing. I have read some recipes here beautifully photographed (I guess there are even Noritake dishes on Bolognese sauce) and I am just feeling like writing some on traditional Brazilian recipes to see if Hayford Peirce will be willing to cook them. Need to go groceries first! Dalton Holland Baptista 15:55, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
When I lived in DC I used to drive about 20 miles north to a small store in MD that had many of Brazilian and Portuguese ingredients. It was the only place I found the right sausages and the other meats to make a good feijoada. Well, when we have a feijoada recipe on CZ I can record a file with its pronunciation. It is not actually hard to say it as it does not have those nasal sounds many Portuguese words do. But I was actually thinking on two other recipes to write: Bacalhoada and Bobó de Camarão. The later is an original recipe from Bahia but has many regional variations. It is made of cashew nuts, shrimps, yucca root, coconut milk, dende oil and a number of ordinary seasonings like onions, tomatoes, peper and garlic. It is fantastic and not as heavy as feijoada! Will work on that soon. Dalton Holland Baptista 16:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Brute force attack

Hi Howard, can you take a look here and I'll be back later to see if you want to approve today (now that you are feeling better - I hope) D. Matt Innis 16:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Hope your feeling better.. can you take one more look here? If you need help with the version number, email me. D. Matt Innis 00:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Welcome message:

Howard -- thanks for the welcome. Although I never thought of myself as a "real" radar person, I have tended to end up processing data collected from "real" radars....

I did notice, right away, that there is a statement in the radar article about SAR that is misleading (that the antenna usually is oriented perpendicular to the direction of travel)...that's only true for "stripmap" radars; we tend to use "spotlight" mode, where the antenna points at a fixed point on the ground, no matter what direction you're traveling. Anyway.

If you have any suggestions to help me get started, I would welcome them. Thanks again. ...said ChristopherRoussi (talk) (Please sign your talk page posts by simply adding four tildes, ~~~~.)

DSP, eh? Might be small world department...Mike Portnoff was in my high school physics class.
Good distinction. I'll have to go back to what I wrote, as I don't think I illustrated that. There are some not-great-graphics about sensor-to-target relationships in the MASINT article help! this man is making me remember what I wrote! I believe I discuss spotlight mode in some of the multispectral sensors. When I drew stripmap there, with a limited graphics package, I was thinking of something easier to draw--simplified coordinate system if you will...
For that matter, I oscillate among trying to call imaging radar MASINT, IMINT, or GEOINT.
You are reminding me that I had also put off drawing a gimbaling aircraft laser designator, mostly because I was having trouble coming up with a good introductory drawing and text.
First, you can simply review and update/correct. Let me throw out one idea: take something that's in the existing radar or MASINT article, or, if you like, something on an actual system, and build it out as a subarticle. As an example of the latter, AN/APG-63 (V)4. I suggest starting with some existing material and spawning a more detailed subarticle, because the parent article will already be linked with related things.
Alternatively, if you do earth resources and the like, that's another approach. We have a couple of contributors that are geographic/surveying experts. Howard C. Berkowitz 18:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


Columns and tables

These are tricky. We have both column formatting and tables; some of the differences involve bordering/cell formatting or columns alone. Often, I simply copy the formatting code from someplace else where it works — my own articles when I know how to make the desired effect, but sometimes either borrow or call for help when there are special effects such as merging cells.

Let me offer some examples: look at the section in regular page view to see if it's the effect you want, and, if so, open the section in edit mode and see the actual commands.

Another option is to put long lists into a Catalog subpage. You create this page by clicking "Catalog" on the talk page list of subpages. Catalog don't have an absolutely rigorous definition; some people just have bullets and links, while others use subheads and explanatory text. One example is at Intelligence interrogation, U.S., George W. Bush Administration/Catalog.

You might want to use a catalog for lists of artists and exhibitions, with annotation. Howard C. Berkowitz 13:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Howard! the article is moved again. Please revert it and I will not touch it again. I do not understand this at all. I may have to quit this thing. (Marika Herskovic 17:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC))

Thanks for the welcome

I never got to thank you for the warm welcome, but I'm rectifying that now. I'm sorry to say that I'm unfamiliar with both charcoal and pastels, but right now, I'm working on Animal. Again, thanks for the welcome! Joshua Choi 06:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I would like to rename the "Chemical corps" article to "Chemical Corps"

Howard, I'd like to rename the article as "Chemical Corps" for following reasons:

  • That is the name used on their website at here
  • That is the name that you used in the second and third paragraphs of the article.
  • That is the name as designated when I was in the Army (circa early 1940s)

Would it be okay by you if I renamed it? Milton Beychok 22:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Question in editing

Hi Howard! Thank you for taking off the metadata complication that I should be blamed for. I have a problem. I am doing the article Albert Kotin but it only appears as Albert Kotin/Related Articles. I must be doing something wrong but I do not see it. Could you help when you have some time? Thank you. (Marika Herskovic 19:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC))

Hi Howard again! I just realized that you asked me about setting up the metadata. I don't know what it is. If you think that it is the correct thing to do then by all means. I hope to get with it a little better in the future. Thank you for your kind attitude. (Marika Herskovic 20:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC))

I tried to do the metadata for Abstract impressionism. I got a little further but I don't think it is correct. I hope to learn it by following you better. (Marika Herskovic 02:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC))
This is what called collaboration. Talking about aptitudes this is a perfect proof. thank you. (Marika Herskovic 11:51, 8 April 2009 (UTC))
If you get into technique as well as history, have fun with my pastel and charcoal (art). I actually might be able to do some work on history of photographic schools; I have eclectic early influences from Edward Weston and Man Ray. Howard C. Berkowitz 14:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I wonder whether you mentioned about your artwork or I misunderstood? (Marika Herskovic 15:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC))
Where do I see the works?(Marika Herskovic 17:15, 8 April 2009 (UTC))
Hi Howard! Would you know why Abstract Impressionism does not appear anywhere?
Hi Howard! Abstract Expressionism and Abstract Impressionism are starting with A. They are non-representational expressionism and certainly not Impressionism since it does not deal with light. Previously Abstract expressionism was under A where it should be. Abstract Impressionism should follow. Thank you. (Marika Herskovic 01:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC))
Thank you for the explanation. Abstract Impressionism should only exist as Main Article. I have still a question: In Related Articles Abstract Impressionism does not turn blue. See: Abstract expressionism and New York School abstract expressionism. I hope to progress in technical issues. Thanks. (Marika Herskovic 01:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC))

Manning O'Brine

Just got this one started. No wimp he! V. hard to find *any* info about him -- your librarian skills would be appreciated if you could locate anything! Hayford Peirce 00:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

clocks

I just noticed that some of my edits are time stamped incorrectly. I can tell since the order of my edits is incorrect in the recent changes. This suggests to me that the two CZ server clocks are not synchronized. Has this been a problem recently? Or is this a new problem due to rebooting the system this morning? Chris Day 17:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

the USS Barbara Boxer

Please stop wasting your time on this and spend 30 seconds looking at Manning O'Brine, a real he-man author. How come in the last footnote I just put in, about his blurb at "No Earth for Foxes", the ISBN number doesn't show up in a blue link, the way they're supposed to? I copied the number off the spine of the book, but there's no number shown inside the book.... Thanks! Hayford Peirce 22:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. (We're having time screw-ups again on our edits.) What do you think I should do? Just leave the number I have? Is there any way to search the LOC for the *real* one? Hayford Peirce 22:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I know. But I just wanted it too look uniform. eBay shows two diff. # -- could you put in one that would work? Thanks! ISBN-10: 044006208X ISBN-13: 9780440062080 ePID: 2100845 Hayford Peirce 23:39, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Danke, mein Herr! Hayford Peirce 22:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Stopping by to say Hi

Hey Howard! Thought I'd ay Hi before back off to work! D. Matt Innis 17:46, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Howard_C._Berkowitz&oldid=455960"