Talk:Dawkins weasel
[edit] Intention
Cdesign Proponentsists - especially W. Demsbski - like to misrepresent Dawkins's algorithm. I just want to gather the facts in one place... larronsicut fur in nocte 07:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Cool. A similar thing was brought up on ASK, it gets a mention in Moving the goalposts where info in the phrase was asked to be increased by a series of mutations. The article probably needs a fuller expansion, but there's no rush. :)
d hominem 08:13, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't the title read "Dawkins' weasel"? Aboriginal Noise What the ... 20:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, actually. I'll get on it.
d hominem 20:55, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- (EC, MC, etc.) No; Dawkins's is correct. Dawkins' means "belonging to several people named Dawkin," while Dawkin's means "belonging to one person named Dawkin." [1]
ListenerXTalkerX 20:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- No; "Dawkins'" and "Dawkins's" are identical, and the link you provided confirms that: "James's hat (James' hat is also acceptable. For plural, proper nouns that are possessive, use an apostrophe after the 's': "The Eggles' presentation was good." The Eggles are a husband and wife consultant team.)" –SuspectedReplicantretire me 07:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- (EC, MC, etc.) No; Dawkins's is correct. Dawkins' means "belonging to several people named Dawkin," while Dawkin's means "belonging to one person named Dawkin." [1]
I'm just a bloody foreigner, but when I created the article, I wanted it to be about the weasel of R. Dawkins, so I think it should be called Dawkins's weasel. If nobody objects, I'll change it back.... larronsicut fur in nocte 07:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Just for the record, on Google, both are used, although "Dawkins' Weasel" is more common. Further reading here where both are sort of correct depending on your manual of style. Or here because WP knows all. In modern practice, it seems to depend on whether you pronounce it "Dawkins Weasel" or "Dawkinses Weasel" - personally I would do the former, but others may vary.
d hominem 10:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Amusingly, google's search results on "Dawkins' Weasel" include the results on "Dawkins's Weasel", but not vice versa... larronsicut fur in nocte 13:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Or we can idiot proof-it and call the article "The Weasel of Dawkins" :P
d hominem 14:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- What about "The Dawkins Weasel"? Totnesmartin 15:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- People's Front of Judean, The Judean People's Front...
d hominem 15:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weasel (algorithm) ? larronsicut fur in nocte 16:13, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- What about a random bunch of letters that may or may not approximate the words Dawkins and Weasel? Can we put those choice tag things in titles? Or is the whole joke too meta? Totnesmartin 21:39, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weasel (algorithm) ? larronsicut fur in nocte 16:13, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- People's Front of Judean, The Judean People's Front...
- What about "The Dawkins Weasel"? Totnesmartin 15:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Or we can idiot proof-it and call the article "The Weasel of Dawkins" :P
- Amusingly, google's search results on "Dawkins' Weasel" include the results on "Dawkins's Weasel", but not vice versa... larronsicut fur in nocte 13:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Weasel script
- METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL Does that work anywhere?
d hominem 22:27, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- It would probably work in more place if I hadn't just reverted the javascript that makes it work :D --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 22:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Shame. I just saw it count down to the one above. It struggled getting the M towards the end, but it got there.
d hominem 22:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- I think it's a good idea. Put it into the article with METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL (making the first sentence gibberish is not a good idea) -- Nx / talk 22:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Feel free to fix up my code to work in browsers other than firefox, plus I just noticed a bug in the code when more than one evolve span was included in the same page.
- MediaWiki provides a getElementsByClassName (uses the native function on browsers that support it, and a javascript implementation on the ones that don't). This should work:
- Feel free to fix up my code to work in browsers other than firefox, plus I just noticed a bug in the code when more than one evolve span was included in the same page.
- I think it's a good idea. Put it into the article with METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL (making the first sentence gibberish is not a good idea) -- Nx / talk 22:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Shame. I just saw it count down to the one above. It struggled getting the M towards the end, but it got there.
- It would probably work in more place if I hadn't just reverted the javascript that makes it work :D --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 22:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
var spans = getElementsByClassName(document.getElementById("bodyContent"),"span","evolve");
- -- Nx / talk 22:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- What was that bug with multiple spans? It seems to be working fine with getElementsByClassName -- Nx / talk 10:14, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- FYI it was working fine in Opera 10, though I didn't see it in IE or older versions of Firefox. Though considering this would be a very specialist feature, the bugs probably aren't that much to worry about. Just a single use of it ticking down on this page would do fine.
d hominem 11:23, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- The bug is that it always removes the last element from the tags to evolve list, regardless of which of them are actually complete. A cockup on my part which I blame entirely on javascript's crappy selection of array ops. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 11:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- FYI it was working fine in Opera 10, though I didn't see it in IE or older versions of Firefox. Though considering this would be a very specialist feature, the bugs probably aren't that much to worry about. Just a single use of it ticking down on this page would do fine.
- What was that bug with multiple spans? It seems to be working fine with getElementsByClassName -- Nx / talk 10:14, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- -- Nx / talk 22:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I think I fixed that and I made it IE compatible. It works in IE8 at least (both normal and compatibility view). -- Nx / talk 15:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
- I made it activate on click so the reader can start it after they read the article. Suggestion on the start button? -- Nx / talk 16:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- Out of curiosity, which algorithm does it use? Time educated Hoover! 16:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- The real Dawkins's weasel, not Dembski's failgorithm. -- Nx / talk 16:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- Nice. I added it into the article to get a feel for it. It's interesting that if you click the start button before it finishes, it restarts, but evolves to the nonsense that it was stuck at when you pressed "start". Which is what I expected it to do, but it may require idiot-proofing due to this.
d hominem 16:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- Nice. I added it into the article to get a feel for it. It's interesting that if you click the start button before it finishes, it restarts, but evolves to the nonsense that it was stuck at when you pressed "start". Which is what I expected it to do, but it may require idiot-proofing due to this.
- The real Dawkins's weasel, not Dembski's failgorithm. -- Nx / talk 16:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- Out of curiosity, which algorithm does it use? Time educated Hoover! 16:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Title
We've identified it as the Dawkins Weasel in the text, so I don't see how having the same page title is "just stupid". According to Wikipedia (WP:Weasel program) it's known as either Dawkins' weasel or the Dawkins weasel. I prefer Dawkins weasel as it dodges the whole Dawkins'/Dawkins's possessive punctuation controversy. Wěǎšěǐǒǐď
Methinks it is a Weasel 18:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)