User contributions for Tdadamemd19

19 March 2024

• 13:3313:33, 19 March 2024 diff hist +2,395 User talk:Tdadamemd19 →March 2024 Tag: Reverted

18 March 2024

• 18:2218:22, 18 March 2024 diff hist +1 Solar System DUMMY EDIT - Robynthehode (talk), the WP:Rollback policy you cite clearly states at the very top that "occasional exceptions may apply". Yet for some reason, you present it as some kind of absolute. This likewise ingnores WP:IAR. The ultimate Wikipedia Policy. I presented very clearly my rationale for reverting. The info continues to be LACKING in this article. Nowhere presented visually. Tag: Reverted
• 18:1318:13, 18 March 2024 diff hist +1,039 Talk:Solar System →Single image depicting both Sizes AND Distances - Critical info which has long been lacking: Apparently long-standing text has not been explained visually. The image added today does just that.
• 18:1018:10, 18 March 2024 diff hist +579 Talk:Solar System →Single image depicting both Sizes AND Distances - Critical info which has long been lacking: FA.
• 17:5017:50, 18 March 2024 diff hist +1 m Talk:Solar System →Single image depicting both Sizes AND Distances - Critical info which has long been lacking
• 17:4917:49, 18 March 2024 diff hist +1,255 Talk:Solar System →Single image depicting both Sizes AND Distances - Critical info which has long been lacking: Addressing Point #4.
• 17:3817:38, 18 March 2024 diff hist +834 Solar System Undid revision 1214384087 by Remsense (talk) Talk Section added. Please read the argument for keeping this before anyone here acts on any urge to revert this vital info. Alternatively, if anyone has a better image to convey this info, I would be ALL FOR THAT. The argument is that something is better than nothing. Tags: Undo Reverted
• 17:3417:34, 18 March 2024 diff hist +4,302 Talk:Solar System →Single image depicting both Sizes AND Distances - Critical info which has long been lacking: new section Tag: New topic
• 16:5016:50, 18 March 2024 diff hist +834 Solar System Undid revision 1214382646 by Remsense The entire world has visceral experience with a football field. A soccer pitch is essentially the same size. And a yard is not a foreign concept either, as it too compares quite closely with a meter. As for being unencyclopedic in style, I suggest to all that this is a WORTHWHILE compromise, until such a more 'professional looking' image is made. The INFO is far more valuable. Tags: Undo Reverted
• 16:4016:40, 18 March 2024 diff hist +20 Solar System →Distances and scales: Adding link to an article which explains how the human eye sees, with background objects toward the distant 'vanishing point' appear much smaller than objects in the foreground. Tag: Reverted
• 16:3316:33, 18 March 2024 diff hist +814 Solar System →Distances and scales: It has been a decade since this image was published to Wikipedia. It is a rare depiction of BOTH sizes AND distances shown to scale. This is information which has been lacking in this article. Images presented to the public here have shown only one or the other. Never both. It is high time that this image be included here. This is VITAL info to be included in this article. It is one thing to say it in words, but quite another to actually show it visually. Tag: Reverted

27 November 2023

• 06:0906:09, 27 November 2023 diff hist +337 User talk:Tdadamemd19 →Hi: Reply Tag: Reply
• 06:0606:06, 27 November 2023 diff hist +1,654 Talk:Nancy Dickerson →Requested move 19 October 2023: I see more that can be discussed here.

4 May 2023

• 12:1512:15, 4 May 2023 diff hist +77 Anna Lee Fisher →In popular culture: I do not know why an artist rendering image was seen to be as preferred over the iconic photo. Restored. NOTE that the black&white image is NOT the "Iconic image" that most people refer to. Compare to the *photograph* that is at the Source Link. These are NOT the same image. One was done by an artist. The other by a photographer. Tag: Reverted

8 February 2023

• 22:3222:32, 8 February 2023 diff hist +86 Talk:Silicon Valley CORRECTION. That editor was discussing a different map, now switched.
• 21:5321:53, 8 February 2023 diff hist +11 m Talk:Silicon Valley →Silicon Valley is NOT a valley
• 21:4821:48, 8 February 2023 diff hist +4,457 Talk:Silicon Valley →Silicon Valley is NOT a valley: Wikipedia is broken. This article needs to be fixed. The SCV article needs to be fixed.
• 21:1021:10, 8 February 2023 diff hist −1 Silicon Valley →Etymology: DUMMY EDIT. Db: "I pointed out on the discussion page that you didn't have any reliable sources for your claim, and you haven't responded to that." << I have not responded? It is apparent that you never read my reply.
• 21:0721:07, 8 February 2023 diff hist −507 Silicon Valley Revert, with new reference added: "A valley represents a low area of LAND located between elevated regions such as hills or mountains." << My emphasis. Still NO ONE has pointed to any definition where a "Bay Valley" is a thing. It's not. Unless you change the plain meaning of the word 'valley'. I am the only one here who has answered the question 'What Is A Valley?' …and provided SUPPORT for this clear understanding that SF Peninsula / SF Bay does NOT count. Please read WP:Consensus. Tag: Reverted
• 20:2620:26, 8 February 2023 diff hist −765 Silicon Valley Undid revision 1138264717 by Danbloch (talk) - Db: "Note that all three editors who responded there oppose this change, so you don't have consensus." This is a statement which displays ignorance regarding WP:Consensus. It is NOT a democracy. One person in that Talk discussion presented SUPPORT for their position. No one else did. No one has shown any DEFINITION of 'valley' where a 12 MILE WIDE bay btwn 2 mtn ranges count as a valley. Tags: Undo Reverted
• 08:3208:32, 8 February 2023 diff hist −765 Silicon Valley →Etymology: REVERT yet again. Let's all have a look at the valleywater.org reference that had been added. It states: "The valley extends in a south-easterly direction from the San Francisco Bay to an area near Hollister." My view was deleted, and then replaced with words supported by this reference which indicates that my view was the ACCURATE view: Santa Clara Valley does not start until the San Francisco Bay has ended. This means that the SF Peninsula is NOT Santa Clara Valley. Tags: Manual revert Reverted
• 03:5403:54, 8 February 2023 diff hist −1 Silicon Valley →Etymology: DUMMY EDIT: Note that the water.ca.gov pdf reference was deleted as a non-sequitur. I have no idea why it was offered as a reference. The word 'silicon' appears 0 times. The word 'valley' appears 6 times, none of which have anything to do with the issue at hand. I do not know why it was offered as a reference as support to anything stated in that edit. Perhaps the person who offered it might like to explain what the purpose was. Tag: Reverted
• 03:3403:34, 8 February 2023 diff hist −140 Silicon Valley →Etymology: REVERT, per unanswered rebuttal posted in Talk section. Note that the Silicon Valley is NOT a longitudinal valley. Santa Clara Valley may be one, BUT these two regions are NOT one and the same thing. The author of the first known published use of SV clearly indicated he was referring to the SF Peninsula & SC Valley. The SF Peninsula is NOT a valley, longitudinal nor otherwise. And the part of Silicon Valley which includes Santa Clara Valley is a SMALL PART of SC Valley. Tags: Manual revert Reverted

7 February 2023

• 23:4623:46, 7 February 2023 diff hist +515 Talk:Silicon Valley →Silicon Valley is NOT a valley: Further elaboration ...for, hopefully, further clarity.
• 23:3823:38, 7 February 2023 diff hist +203 Talk:Silicon Valley →Silicon Valley is NOT a valley: Elaborating on the original point, for emphasis.
• 23:3223:32, 7 February 2023 diff hist +2,544 Talk:Silicon Valley →Silicon Valley is NOT a valley: Reply Tag: Reply
• 22:2322:23, 7 February 2023 diff hist +1,482 Talk:Silicon Valley →Silicon Valley is NOT a valley: new section Tag: New topic
• 21:5221:52, 7 February 2023 diff hist +3 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Fixing the punctuation to match the exact abbreviation published as the title of his article.
• 21:5121:51, 7 February 2023 diff hist +2 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Fixing my reference formatting error.
• 21:4921:49, 7 February 2023 diff hist +171 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Noting that the person who popularized this term had been explicit in identifying "the San Francisco Peninsula and Santa Clara Valley" as the region he was referring to in his article titled "Silicon Valley U.S.A."
• 21:4321:43, 7 February 2023 diff hist +144 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Rewording, needed to make it clear that the term was in use at the time when Hoefler first heard it, according to this source.
• 21:3021:30, 7 February 2023 diff hist +39 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Introducing computers into this section, as it is central in both hardware and software aspects.
• 21:2721:27, 7 February 2023 diff hist +33 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Tweak. Also, consideration can be given to MERGING this Etymology section with the History, as the two are closely intertwined.
• 21:2521:25, 7 February 2023 diff hist −29 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Removing the superfluous "originally", as the connection to chips has never changed meaning. Wording then streamlined.
• 21:2021:20, 7 February 2023 diff hist +2,049 Silicon Valley →Etymology: Simple Wikipedia gets this part right, "Even though it's not truly a valley..." I see no reason why Main Wikipedia cannot likewise explain this misnomer regarding the name "Silicon Valley".

29 January 2023

• 18:5218:52, 29 January 2023 diff hist +2,485 Talk:Gilda (film) →Gilda Radner connection: new section Tag: New topic
• 18:5218:52, 29 January 2023 diff hist +1,064 Gilda (film) Undid revision 1133420767. Please see new Talk section regarding this action. And let's be on guard to help prevent vandalism of our wonderful project here. Tags: Undo Reverted

13 January 2023

• 23:5323:53, 13 January 2023 diff hist +377 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb
• 22:3022:30, 13 January 2023 diff hist +33 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Oops.
• 22:2822:28, 13 January 2023 diff hist +1,321 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Rebuttal. Hopefully the last needed.
• 20:5820:58, 13 January 2023 diff hist +99 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Elaborating as to why this is not Synthesis.
• 20:5020:50, 13 January 2023 diff hist +20 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Tweak.
• 20:4820:48, 13 January 2023 diff hist +678 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Elaborating with an illustration.
• 20:3620:36, 13 January 2023 diff hist +1,502 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Au contraire. (Read: Binksternet, you ignorant slut.)
• 18:2318:23, 13 January 2023 diff hist +35 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Tweaking to reflect the exact format that was originally posted.
• 18:2118:21, 13 January 2023 diff hist −1 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: Tightening.
• 18:1918:19, 13 January 2023 diff hist +1,798 Talk:Gilda Radner →Gilda - The 4th nuclear bomb: new section Tag: New topic

12 January 2023

• 06:2006:20, 12 January 2023 diff hist +252 Operation Crossroads →Cameras: Adding image of the 'Gilda' bomb.
• 06:1206:12, 12 January 2023 diff hist +218 Gilda (film) →Operation Crossroads nuclear test: Adding photo of the Mark III bomb which had been painted with its nickname 'Gilda', featuring a photo of Rita Hayworth in the title role. Tag: Reverted
• 04:3704:37, 12 January 2023 diff hist +846 Gilda (film) →Operation Crossroads nuclear test: Switching section heading to include Gilda Radner, and how she was named after the lead character from this movie. Tag: Reverted