Being sick is boring

I've mostly spent the past week being sick, and/or getting over being sick, depending on how one looks at it. I took two sick days (Monday and Tuesday of last week), then worked from home on Wednesday. Thursday and Friday I went to work, and grumbled about some of the details of that (it's not my boss's fault, but we are on another annoying project that will mess up deadlines).

cattitude got back from California Friday evening, and has been taking care of me over this long weekend. This helped, both on a variety of emotional levels, and on the practicalities of not needing to go out if the milk supply was running low. (I pushed things a little on Tuesday, to get stuff like milk, juice, and toilet paper before the snowstorm. Going back to work on Thursday may also have counted as pushing myself.)

For chunks of this, I haven't even been focused enough to do any interesting reading, instead doing a lot of sudoku puzzles and rereading some Will Cuppy. I haven't been to the gym in a bit, which isn't good for my mood, but given the way my chest was feeling as recently as yesterday I'm going to wait until Thursday and my next appointment with Emilie. (I'm breathing reasonably deeply, but by evening there was some soreness, as of overexertion, near my sternum. Lots of hot liquids.)

I had meant to try to see people while Cattitude was away on business, but first I put off making plans while I saw how much time I needed alone, and then it was clear that I was sick, so I didn't arrange to see anyone. julian_tiger and adrian_turtle were both helpful in different ways, but both encouraged me to rest.

Wikipedia is not original research

and it should not be cited as such.

A reference in an article to a specific person's work should not just say "Dijkstra, E. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guarded_Command_Language." Fortunately, Wikipedia is footnoted, so I have sent this article back with the suggestion of citing the original paper either via Dijkstra's web site, or as published in Communications of the ACM (which is referenced on the copy of the paper on the author's web site). Citing the paper and then pointing to Wikipedia for more information on the topic would, I think, be reasonable. But I am not the editor here, I'm the proofreader, so it's someone else's decision.

(As it happens, this particular Wikipedia article notes "needs additional citations for verification" at the top.)