Nomoonman

Omura's whale

Please don't remove unit conversions in articles such as Omura's whale. It is considered appropriate to use the very well tested "convert" template in places where both units of measure are used. Dger (talk) 01:57, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Use one that doesn't round numbers up then, asshole. Nomoonman (talk) 02:34, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I had to fix all that sh%t manually. Do you know how long the common minke page is gonna take you piece of sh%t? What the f%$k is your problem?? Use a converter that doesn't f$%k up conversions or go the f%&k home you stupid c$nt. Nomoonman (talk) 02:47, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

And what was with that 1984 sh#t? That's new. Nomoonman (talk) 02:49, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for personal attacks on other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Rlendog (talk) 03:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Properly converting meters to feet

Since I'm blocked from editing, could someone please fix the conversion templates used on the articles I edited? Your converter thinks 1 meter equals 3.3 feet. Thus, 27.3 m is converted into 90 feet. One meter is actually 3.281 feet, which would make 27.3 meters 89.57 feet. These figures aren't "guesstimates" as one editor naively assumed. Could someone please remedy this? Nomoonman (talk) 01:27, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

I take back the "guesstimate"; what you are doing is more in the way of false precision. However, the easiest way to get the results you want appears not to be to screw up the coding of the article for all later editors, but to state the needed precision in the conversion template. See Template:Convert#Rounding:_100_ft_is_30.C2.A0m_or_30.5.C2.A0m_or_30.48.C2.A0m.3F. E.g., if you want rounding to within 1/10 of a foot, add "|1" before the closing brackets.

Of course, that won't help if the cited source gives a value in meters that is less precise. In that case your only recourse would be to find a source that gives the value at higher precision and/or smaller units, and add that reference. -- Elmidae (talk) 07:03, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

"False precision"? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. The source for the longest recorded fin whale specifically says it gets to 27.3 meters or 89.5 ft. The others either only give the length in meters or correctly convert meters to feet. I like how you don't even know any of the sources in question. You're just another janitor running his mouth. Whoever made this mistake in the first place should go fix it. I'm not adding that little text you suggested to every damned messed up conversion. What the hell is wrong with just giving the actual figures in meters and feet? Why do you insist on using these goddamn converters? Oh, that's right. "It's convention" Sheep. You're just another little automation picking up the crumbs. Nomoonman (talk) 19:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Looks like you need an even longer block since you persist with personal attacks. 90 feet is the correct conversion if you round to 2 significant figures. If you want more digits then as was suggested add the "|1" option. Your own rounding was incorrect (should be 89.6) so we can't trust your mathematics. In fact that is why the Convert template was created, because too many people made incorrect conversions. By the way how do you think the measurement of 27.3 m was generated? A whale is a very flexible creature. Was it alive or dead? It might have shrunk if it was out of the water for any length of time. Was it hung so that its body was straight? (That would need a very tall crane.) Or was it lying on a flat surface which means it was probably shorter then when in the water? Did they use a tape measure that followed the body shape or was it done with a very large anthropometer? I don't think you should take the 27.3 measurement as a very accurate measurement. Let it go. You are on very slippery ground (perhaps like standing on a whale). Dger (talk) 23:21, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

It was 89.57. You rounded up. I love how you have to type sentence after sentence about a subject you clearly know nothing about. It was a 27.3 m (89.5 ft) female caught off the South Shetland Islands in January 1925. Whether it was measured or not I can't say. It wasn't measured by a scientist in the standard zoological manner (in a straight line from the tip of the rostrum to the notch of the flukes) though, so it probably wasn't measured accurately (if at all). It was most likely measured alongside a factory ship during flensing (unless it was taken to the Deception Island station). This was just before the widespread use of stern slipways, so it would have been difficult to measure if it indeed was. The cited source should be Mackintosh and Wheeler (1929), which cite Risting (1928), which I don't have access to. Mackintosh and Wheeler simply say it was "27.3 m. or 89 ft. 6 in." (p. 321). Risting probably originally gave it in Norwegian feet, which Mackintosh and Wheeler converted into meters and English feet to conform to their figures. Also, you're a dumb bitch who runs her mouth about shit she knows nothing about. Say hi to Hiroski for me. :) Nomoonman (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll be talking to the blocking admin re an extension of your block. Your behaviour is unacceptable. -- Elmidae (talk) 05:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

And although I doubt you are unaware of this... WP:sock puppetry will get you booted right out of Wikipedia, especially if you use it for edit-warring. Please stop. -- Elmidae (talk) 05:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hiro's not a puppet. He's my friend and partner. :p Nomoonman (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015

• I've revoked access to your Talk page for your inappropriate use of it. You may use WP:UTRS to appeal.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)