User contributions for Ubewu

6 April 2014

• 03:2403:24, 6 April 2014 diff hist +4,599‎ Talk:List of pseudoscientific water fuel inventions ‎ Unsourced dubious material

5 April 2014

• 01:5801:58, 5 April 2014 diff hist 0‎ User talk:Ubewu ‎ →‎it really happened
• 01:4901:49, 5 April 2014 diff hist +372‎ User talk:Ubewu ‎No edit summary

20 February 2014

• 21:0621:06, 20 February 2014 diff hist +497‎ User:Ubewu ‎ The stupid and cocksure current
• 19:4019:40, 20 February 2014 diff hist +189‎ User talk:Ubewu ‎ →‎it really happened

18 February 2014

• 02:2402:24, 18 February 2014 diff hist +10‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ Looks like fighter (pointy nose), made of many fighter parts. But, more accurately categorized as a research aircraft. It was never built with the intention of developing it into a fighter, rather it's technologies could be used in many aero applications.
• 02:1402:14, 18 February 2014 diff hist +22‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ Rearranged some wording in a more logical order (I hope). Added "controllable up to about 25deg" and that the 67deg run was in a momentary maneuver (both from the ref).
• 01:3401:34, 18 February 2014 diff hist +52‎ m Grumman X-29 ‎ →‎Operational history: Linked online ref.
• 01:1101:11, 18 February 2014 diff hist +95‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ →‎Operational history: Added the other most reliable ref: X-29 High AOA Air Force Technical Report. This report doesn't support a characterization of "high" maneuverability at high AOA, rather minimal controllability up to about 30deg AOA.
• 00:4900:49, 18 February 2014 diff hist −28‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ Brought lede in line with new material. Instead of trying to correct the "increased agility" assertion as only a myth, I avoided the subject by just removing the assertion from the lede.
• 00:4100:41, 18 February 2014 diff hist +963‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ →‎Three-surface design and inherent instability: Added summary taken directly from just about the most reliable ref there can be, the USAF Flying Qualities Technical Report. Avoided objectionable "purported" (even though the ref used it).

17 February 2014

• 08:0408:04, 17 February 2014 diff hist +112‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ Added citation for "purported". The word is used in that document the exact same way it's used here.
• 07:1607:16, 17 February 2014 diff hist −95‎ Cold fusion ‎ Bunk. Removed uncited dubious bunk. This POV bullshit isn't cited and IS NOT a summary of material in the main body. Fix it first asshole, before knee-jerk reversions.

5 February 2014

• 04:0904:09, 5 February 2014 diff hist −14‎ Method of exhaustion ‎ →‎Archimedes: No need to qualify with an "incidentally". If it really is notable, just say it. It's more encyclopedic (vs. conversational) that way.

1 February 2014

• 21:1521:15, 1 February 2014 diff hist +751‎ Talk:History of religion in the United States ‎ →‎WP:NOR applies to inclusion, not to removal. Burden of evidence is on restoration.: Hmmm...
• 20:4320:43, 1 February 2014 diff hist +208‎ Talk:Cold fusion ‎ →‎User discussion: Yeah.
• 19:4819:48, 1 February 2014 diff hist +650‎ Talk:History of religion in the United States ‎ →‎WP:NOR applies to inclusion, not to removal. Burden of evidence is on restoration.: refinement
• 19:3019:30, 1 February 2014 diff hist −339‎ History of religion in the United States ‎ WP:NOR applies to inclusion, not to removal. Burden of evidence is on restoration. Adjusting for pop is *very much* called for because it makes the diff between supporting and not supporting the caption. See talk page for fuller discussion.
• 19:2419:24, 1 February 2014 diff hist +2,116‎ Talk:History of religion in the United States ‎ →‎WP:NOR applies to inclusion, not to removal. Burden of evidence is on restoration.: new section
• 06:3406:34, 1 February 2014 diff hist +4‎ Cold fusion ‎ →‎Helium, heavy elements, and neutrons: "Claimed" is loaded, walks hand-in-hand with "dubious claim". If dubiousity is intended to be asserted, say it directly and CITE it (give support for dubiousness). Else, use terms that are indisputably unloaded.
• 05:5605:56, 1 February 2014 diff hist −18‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ →‎Three-surface design and inherent instability: Brought citation out of text into more conventional inline citation. No need to mention ref in the text. It's distracting unencyclopedic form. Just say the fact & hold source a click's distance away.
• 05:4505:45, 1 February 2014 diff hist +17‎ Grumman X-29 ‎ Widely purported, but the need to provide stability and prevent divergence led to the "full loop" stability and agility to be ordinary. Only lots of control power (big control surfaces) and FAST actuators actually get you agility! :-) .
• 05:0905:09, 1 February 2014 diff hist −8‎ Methodism ‎ →‎United States: Uncited, subjective. Chart doesn't support it when adjusted for population. Most of section uncited, needs a big-ol' section tag. Assertions of large growth very weak, need RELIABLE citations (not that chart) to ward against deletion.
• 04:5604:56, 1 February 2014 diff hist +103‎ Methodism ‎ →‎United States: Clarified that growth shown is *in proportion* to other sects, warned to not misinterpret overall growth as much other than population growth. See file comments at ...wiki/File:Growth_of_Denominations_in_America_1780_to_1860.jpg
• 04:5104:51, 1 February 2014 diff hist +98‎ History of Methodism in the United States ‎ →‎First and Second Awakenings: Clarified growth shown *in proportion* to other sects, warned to not misinterpret overall growth as much other than population growth. See file comments at ...wiki/File:Growth_of_Denominations_in_America_1780_to_1860.jpg
• 04:3204:32, 1 February 2014 diff hist −339‎ History of religion in the United States ‎ Still unadjusted for pop. Still doesn't support "sharp rise" when adjusted. New ref in caption was nice, but didn't address fundamental misapplication of the graph. See file's comments at "...wiki/File:Growth_of_Denominations_in_America_1780_to_1860.jpg"
• 03:4903:49, 1 February 2014 diff hist +777‎ Talk:Cold fusion ‎ →‎User discussion: "it" is ambiguous, so we should clarify "it" in the text. Is it "the CF name", or "the assertion that fusion is the only source", "the measurement of Pxs", or what? Apparently it's "the entire field" and everything about it..
• 02:3802:38, 1 February 2014 diff hist −1,210‎ Catalytic converter ‎ →‎Environmental impact: This is a "common confusion", not an "impact". A logical fallacy. By that reasoning, the fact that it doesn't sweep my floors would be an "impact" of leaving dirtier floors! :-) .

31 January 2014

• 05:0105:01, 31 January 2014 diff hist +2,313‎ Talk:Cold fusion ‎ →‎Biased language: Biased? Yep. Agree.

24 January 2014

• 19:3619:36, 24 January 2014 diff hist +15‎ N User talk:Ubewu ‎ ←Created page with 'User talk:Ubewu'
• 19:3619:36, 24 January 2014 diff hist +5‎ N User:Ubewu ‎ ←Created page with 'ubewu'