Talk:2715: Pando - Revision history

Psychoticpotato: commenting

2024-05-03T18:33:37Z

commenting

172.71.242.70 at 07:07, 13 January 2024

2024-01-13T07:07:12Z

172.71.150.151: Weird tangent on lights

2024-01-13T05:28:48Z

Weird tangent on lights

162.158.34.204 at 22:41, 27 December 2022

2022-12-27T22:41:27Z

DJXD at 18:09, 27 December 2022

2022-12-27T18:09:21Z

DJXD: I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ft. of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox ~~~~DJXD

2022-12-27T18:02:13Z

I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ft. of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox ~~~~DJXD

162.158.74.21: /* OpenStreetMap has an outline */

2022-12-25T22:15:50Z

‎OpenStreetMap has an outline

162.158.222.124: Added comment about a possible relationship to one of this year's animated feature films.

2022-12-25T17:15:48Z

Added comment about a possible relationship to one of this year's animated feature films.

172.70.188.128: /* OpenStreetMap has an outline */ new section

2022-12-25T08:16:45Z

‎OpenStreetMap has an outline: new section

172.70.85.174 at 12:32, 24 December 2022

2022-12-24T12:32:16Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:33, 3 May 2024
Line 58:		Line 58:

	Surprisingly reasonable, considering some of the massive displays in the past with incandescents would have used that much on a single house. {{unsigned ip\|172.71.150.151\|05:28, 13 January 2024}}		Surprisingly reasonable, considering some of the massive displays in the past with incandescents would have used that much on a single house. {{unsigned ip\|172.71.150.151\|05:28, 13 January 2024}}
		+
		+	The coward didn't wrap any of the inner trees. What a wimp. (joke) [[User:Psychoticpotato\|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato\|talk]]) 18:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
-== But how many LEDs and watts is that? ==
+;But how many LEDs and watts is that?
 So I happened to be flipping through these articles (just for the bonus entertainment factor) and I wondered, how many LEDs and Watts would this need to use?
@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 So some simple math and 9300 feet becomes 142.4 strings, so 143 strings, or 14300 Lights, and that's only 700.7 Watts.
-Surprisingly reasonable, considering some of the massive displays in the past with incandescents would have used that much on a single house.
+Surprisingly reasonable, considering some of the massive displays in the past with incandescents would have used that much on a single house. {{unsigned ip|172.71.150.151|05:28, 13 January 2024}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:28, 13 January 2024
Line 47:		Line 47:
	I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ft. of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox {{unsigned\|DJXD\|18:09, 27 December 2022}}		I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ft. of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox {{unsigned\|DJXD\|18:09, 27 December 2022}}
	:Because it clearly wraps around the extremities (see the Convex Hull wikilink), even some fractal nature of the 'actual' border doesn't give a lim->inf perimeter. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.204\|162.158.34.204]] 22:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)		:Because it clearly wraps around the extremities (see the Convex Hull wikilink), even some fractal nature of the 'actual' border doesn't give a lim->inf perimeter. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.204\|162.158.34.204]] 22:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
		+
		+
		+	== But how many LEDs and watts is that? ==
		+
		+	So I happened to be flipping through these articles (just for the bonus entertainment factor) and I wondered, how many LEDs and Watts would this need to use?
		+
		+	I happen to still have my christmas lights up, and on so I just walked out with a kill-a-watt and measured them. For 100 C9 LEDs with 65.3 ft, it's 4.9 watts.
		+
		+	So some simple math and 9300 feet becomes 142.4 strings, so 143 strings, or 14300 Lights, and that's only 700.7 Watts.
		+
		+	Surprisingly reasonable, considering some of the massive displays in the past with incandescents would have used that much on a single house.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:41, 27 December 2022
Line 45:		Line 45:
	:I wuldn't know if Randall got to know of real!Pando only via disney!Pando and then had his own idea, but I'd probably default to thinking it was just a random thing he already knew (or learnt a tid-bit about from a random wikiwalk?) and ended up putting into his 'ideas that would work with a Christmas comic' folder... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21\|162.158.74.21]] 22:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)		:I wuldn't know if Randall got to know of real!Pando only via disney!Pando and then had his own idea, but I'd probably default to thinking it was just a random thing he already knew (or learnt a tid-bit about from a random wikiwalk?) and ended up putting into his 'ideas that would work with a Christmas comic' folder... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21\|162.158.74.21]] 22:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

−	I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ft. of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox	+	I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ft. of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox {{unsigned\|DJXD\|18:09, 27 December 2022}}
		+	:Because it clearly wraps around the extremities (see the Convex Hull wikilink), even some fractal nature of the 'actual' border doesn't give a lim->inf perimeter. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.204\|162.158.34.204]] 22:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:09, 27 December 2022
Line 45:		Line 45:
	:I wuldn't know if Randall got to know of real!Pando only via disney!Pando and then had his own idea, but I'd probably default to thinking it was just a random thing he already knew (or learnt a tid-bit about from a random wikiwalk?) and ended up putting into his 'ideas that would work with a Christmas comic' folder... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21\|162.158.74.21]] 22:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)		:I wuldn't know if Randall got to know of real!Pando only via disney!Pando and then had his own idea, but I'd probably default to thinking it was just a random thing he already knew (or learnt a tid-bit about from a random wikiwalk?) and ended up putting into his 'ideas that would work with a Christmas comic' folder... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21\|162.158.74.21]] 22:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

−	I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ~~miles~~ of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox	+	I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 ft. of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:02, 27 December 2022
Line 44:		Line 44:
	:Not familiar with Disney's thing. But sounds like they also (separately and differently) were inspired by the real Pando.		:Not familiar with Disney's thing. But sounds like they also (separately and differently) were inspired by the real Pando.
	:I wuldn't know if Randall got to know of real!Pando only via disney!Pando and then had his own idea, but I'd probably default to thinking it was just a random thing he already knew (or learnt a tid-bit about from a random wikiwalk?) and ended up putting into his 'ideas that would work with a Christmas comic' folder... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21\|162.158.74.21]] 22:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)		:I wuldn't know if Randall got to know of real!Pando only via disney!Pando and then had his own idea, but I'd probably default to thinking it was just a random thing he already knew (or learnt a tid-bit about from a random wikiwalk?) and ended up putting into his 'ideas that would work with a Christmas comic' folder... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21\|162.158.74.21]] 22:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
		+
		+	I feel like there's an element of the Coastline paradox at play here in that only 9,300 miles of lights would be a pretty conservative estimate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:15, 25 December 2022
Line 42:		Line 42:

	Is'nt this linked to Disney's Christmas offering this year - Strange World - in some way seeing as in the film they grow something called Pando, which turns out to be one large colony. Also Pando glows a bit like christmas lights. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.124\|162.158.222.124]] 17:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)		Is'nt this linked to Disney's Christmas offering this year - Strange World - in some way seeing as in the film they grow something called Pando, which turns out to be one large colony. Also Pando glows a bit like christmas lights. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.124\|162.158.222.124]] 17:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
		+	:Not familiar with Disney's thing. But sounds like they also (separately and differently) were inspired by the real Pando.
		+	:I wuldn't know if Randall got to know of real!Pando only via disney!Pando and then had his own idea, but I'd probably default to thinking it was just a random thing he already knew (or learnt a tid-bit about from a random wikiwalk?) and ended up putting into his 'ideas that would work with a Christmas comic' folder... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21\|162.158.74.21]] 22:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:15, 25 December 2022
Line 40:		Line 40:

	The explanation currently links to Google Maps with an outline. OpenStreetMap has a much smaller area marked as the forest: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/677753549#map=18/38.52463/-111.75065 Which is correct? Should OSM be updated? The OSM geometry can be used in the Wikipedia article, if it's correct. (Maybe this wiki could even embed a map? I'm not sure what it supports.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.188.128\|172.70.188.128]] 08:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)		The explanation currently links to Google Maps with an outline. OpenStreetMap has a much smaller area marked as the forest: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/677753549#map=18/38.52463/-111.75065 Which is correct? Should OSM be updated? The OSM geometry can be used in the Wikipedia article, if it's correct. (Maybe this wiki could even embed a map? I'm not sure what it supports.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.188.128\|172.70.188.128]] 08:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
		+
		+	Is'nt this linked to Disney's Christmas offering this year - Strange World - in some way seeing as in the film they grow something called Pando, which turns out to be one large colony. Also Pando glows a bit like christmas lights. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.124\|162.158.222.124]] 17:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:16, 25 December 2022
Line 36:		Line 36:
	:It would also help if instead of <code>some kind of statement of fact,<nowiki>[bare_reference]</nowiki></code>, it was more <code>some kind of statement <nowiki>[text_reference of fact]</nowiki>,</code>, IMO, but the last edit I made to that bit myself was before some of this increasing need to qualify the qualifying statements and made it obvious that concensus hadn't settled down yet.		:It would also help if instead of <code>some kind of statement of fact,<nowiki>[bare_reference]</nowiki></code>, it was more <code>some kind of statement <nowiki>[text_reference of fact]</nowiki>,</code>, IMO, but the last edit I made to that bit myself was before some of this increasing need to qualify the qualifying statements and made it obvious that concensus hadn't settled down yet.
	:Definitely prime for a minor rewrite of that snippet. Reorganise, split concepts, perhaps even lose something (arguable ''what'', though, and it might be reinserted) as one simplifies. Not gonna be me doing it, right now, but perhaps only for time reasons. Anyone can try, though, and as likely to be improving as anybody else. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.56\|172.70.162.56]] 12:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)		:Definitely prime for a minor rewrite of that snippet. Reorganise, split concepts, perhaps even lose something (arguable ''what'', though, and it might be reinserted) as one simplifies. Not gonna be me doing it, right now, but perhaps only for time reasons. Anyone can try, though, and as likely to be improving as anybody else. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.56\|172.70.162.56]] 12:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
		+
		+	== OpenStreetMap has an outline ==
		+
		+	The explanation currently links to Google Maps with an outline. OpenStreetMap has a much smaller area marked as the forest: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/677753549#map=18/38.52463/-111.75065 Which is correct? Should OSM be updated? The OSM geometry can be used in the Wikipedia article, if it's correct. (Maybe this wiki could even embed a map? I'm not sure what it supports.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.188.128\|172.70.188.128]] 08:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 This is a terrible sentence: "The celebration is often claimed to be built heavily upon pagan traditions,[2] though this is disputed by some historians[3], as well as on annual social customs, then arguably converted into a far more secular event for many." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.136|172.70.211.136]] 05:41, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 :Like "a camel is a horse designed by committee", it was through multiple edits, as varying views were inserted.
-:It would also help if instead of <code>some kind of statement of fact,<nowiki>[bare_reference]</nowiki></code>, it was more <code>some kind of statement <nowiki>[bare_reference of fact]</nowiki>,</code>, IMO, but the last edit I made to that bit myself was before some of this increasing need to qualify the qualifying statements and made it obvious that concensus hadn't settled down yet.
+:It would also help if instead of <code>some kind of statement of fact,<nowiki>[bare_reference]</nowiki></code>, it was more <code>some kind of statement <nowiki>[text_reference of fact]</nowiki>,</code>, IMO, but the last edit I made to that bit myself was before some of this increasing need to qualify the qualifying statements and made it obvious that concensus hadn't settled down yet.
 :Definitely prime for a minor rewrite of that snippet. Reorganise, split concepts, perhaps even lose something (arguable ''what'', though, and it might be reinserted) as one simplifies. Not gonna be me doing it, right now, but perhaps only for time reasons. Anyone can try, though, and as likely to be improving as anybody else. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.56|172.70.162.56]] 12:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)