![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Whether this category should be in Category:Currencies of Oceania or in Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific, which is a parent of the first one, should be discussed on Category Talk:Currencies of Australia. Can we avoid an edit war? -- Bduke 03:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Should this The Wolf Cub's Handbook be merged somewhere or tagged for expanding? I think we have something related to it somewhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rlevse ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC).
I've done some work on this lately. Can you look at the Australia and UK parts of it for improvement? I'd like to go for GA soon. I'll be adding too. It definitely needs more wikilinks and refs. Rlevse 11:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Brian, Bentiromide (data page) has come up for deletion today, and while it looks like these "(data pages)" are normal, I dont know much about how the norms on displaying chemical data on WP. I was hoping to list it on a deletion sorting page watched by members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry, but I couldnt find the appropriate page so I've listed it on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Science. Could you take a look? Cheers, John. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jayvdb ( talk • contribs) 09:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC).
Bduke, I appreciate your additions to the Molecular orbital theory, but I have two suggestions regarding references. Yes I like seeing page references, but doing this in Wikipedia, as far as I know, gives a cluttered, redundant look to the reference section, e.g. see: Molecular orbital theory#References as you have it. Specific page references seem to only work good in when used in books. I thought it was a reference format typo when I saw it. Also, it is nice when people use the standard templates, such as:
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)This keeps all the references in Wikipedia uniform. Just some friendly suggestions. -- Sadi Carnot 00:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
To use pages, you would code your original ref:
To this (click the edit button to see the code):
Talk later, -- Sadi Carnot 02:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. The scout merit badge is for both the north and the south, its all one organisation for scouting ireland.
Hi! Thanks for the message!... In short, no - I'm not an English nationalist, but I can understand your point as this pops up from time to time... I'm unsure of your familiarity with the various naming conventions, guidelines and policies, but it is convention to use the constituent countries of the UK as the primary geographic reference frame, rather than the UK itself. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it satisfies most editors, most of the time (particularly the Scottish!), and is the most common approach on other encyclopedias.
I should add that the UK can certainly be added as an afternote, so long as the c.c. is also mentioned however.
I hope that explains things a little! Kindest regards, Jhamez84 23:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
It's true, they might rename it, but I figure it's a Wiki, and I didn't think following conventions strictly would be such a good idea for such an unwieldy name. Do you think making that category is a good idea? I just thought it would be a good idea to remove the "listiness" from that page. I'll hold off on adding more to that category for now. I just wanted to do some experiments with it for now.
I'm worried about the article itself though. It seems like a cut and paste of the original site, and I think it would be best to rewrite it completely. -- HappyCamper 02:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Added refs and removed tag. TimVickers 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Please look at the article Molecular Hamiltonian for molecular motions. Maybe you can make some useful additions/changes to this article. -- P.wormer 10:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Bduke,
You left a message for me on my talk page. Let me respond. I find it arrogant that you would hold yourself up to be judge of what is fit and not fit to be published on Wikipedia. You have no entry on Eugene Guth, despite his significant contributions to several branches of physices, and his pioneering contributions to polymer physics.
Who better to keep track of his scientific achievements than his own son? I find your reasoning here to be specious at best. If you can find one single error in any statement that I put into my father's biogrpahy, then by all means, challenge that point. I would love to match my IQ against yours and debate the content of my own father's biography with you.
It would be trivially easy for me to find a friend who would submit to Wikipedia the exact same article that I wrote verbatim. Would that take care of your perceived "conflict of interest"?
Wikipedia needs to look for the best sources available -- first-hand knowledge is always better than fourth-hand knowledge. If Wikipedia cannot find a way to edit articles without inflaming the contributors, then it is a sorry organization. There is no excuse for the way in which the article on my father was deleted without any notice to me. Some bozo graduate student in Russia has the power to get an article pulled? Shame. That is putting it mildly.
Mikeguth 03:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Hang on my friend. My comment on your talk page was about your edits to List of important publications in physics not about the article on your father. Those additions are still there, in spite of the fact that they do not follow the guidelines for that list since they do not properly give a description and a statement of importance. Nobody has touched them although they should. However these are not the only poor entries. There are many others that do not follow the guidelines. The article on your father was tagged as a copyright violation by User:Conscious. I had nothing to do with it. Did you read that copyright notice. It tells you exactly what you have to do and you did not do it. I have read your remarks to User:Conscious. You are quite wrong. The article does not include fair use quotes. It copies stuff from an outside source. Wikipedia has to be fully open source. Although such violations are quite common (I fixed one only yesterday that has been there for a year so) they are still wrong and unacceptable. In you comments you also breach other Wikipedia guidelines showing a lack of civility ( WP:CIVIL). Calling a fellow editor a "bozo" is not acceptable. I am going to revert the changes to Eugene Guth and hope you will start again. Read the various policies, including Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, WP:BIO, Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and so on. Follow the WP guidelines and policies and you will be fine. If you do not, you will get angry as you obviously are and not understand what Wikipedia is and what it is not. -- Bduke 05:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
My latest revision of the article on my father did not contain one single quotation from an outside source. And yet you, or some other administrator, AGAIN removed it as a copyright infringement. Explain to me how an article without one single quotation from an outside work and merely summarizing scientific knowledge in the public domain (available in many different sources) is a copyright infringement?
User:Conscious is just a user -- he is not tagged or indicated as an "Editor." Frankly, I would be astounded if Wikipedia chose a graduate student in physics to be the Editor of scientific biographies.
I am not wrong about fair use. I am an attorney at law. I know the fair use doctrine far better than a Chemist in Australia. As to civility, when you take down an article without any notice to the original contributor, I believe a reasonable person would expect a sharp reaction. User:Conscious can deal with that, if you are not the person who took down my father's biographical sketch.
06:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC) (above added by User:Mikeguth)
I did indeed revert back to the version that contained the copyvio tag. I told you I was going to. As I said, you need to read the copyvio tag. It does not say that you can fix the article by reverting back to where it was before. It says:-
I am not an administrator. You have to convince one. OK, you are an attorney at law. Do you understand the license that all wikipedia articles are released under? Was nothing on your article copied word for word from an outside document such as a university web site on your father? The list of awards and prizes looked exactly like that. You can not copy stuff from elsewhere unless it islicensed under the GNU Free Documentation License or a very similar free license. This is not the same as "public domain".
You say:-
This just shows how profoundly you do not understand wikipedia. Wikipedia does not have editors as opposed to users. You can edit any article, even if you do not register. Wikipedia does not chose anybody to edit scientific biographies, or indeed any article. You seem also to be unclear who did what to the artcile. Click on the history tag at the top of the Eugene Guth page. That shows you who has edited the page and when.
Now I do think that you father should have an article. Will you allow me to advise and mentor you? This is my advice. First calm down and read some of the policies and guidelines. Second, recognise that you do have a conflict of interest. This is obvious. You are his son. Read WP:COI. Third, you can create and edit the article on your father but you have to be particularly careful. Then read WP:BIO, WP:NPOV and WP:OR. You have to write from a neutral point of view. You can not do original research. That means you can not add anything to the article that you know only because you are his son. Then click on the history and bring up the last version you wrote. It is the link to "15:08, 13 January 2007" in the second line. Click on edit and highlight the whole lot. Save everything to the clipboard with Contrl:C. Do not save. Cancel the edit and go back to the current version with the copyvio tag. Click on the link it says is a temporary subpage. Put the material you saved in the edit window with Contrl:V. Edit it on the subpage until you are happy. The version you left was a mess. The images did not appear for example. Then let me know. Give me the full URL to the temp subpage. I'll look at it amd then I'll find an administrator to fix it for you. Once in place I and others can help you improve it. Some other advice. Do not include a long list of awards. Just add the most important. Do not add a list of publications. Read some other biographies of scientists and see how they are written. Read Wikipedia:WikiProject Academics for some suggestions on this. Above all remember that everything in the article must be referenced to verifiable outside sources. This is where you have to be particularly carefull as his son. Someone else perhaps could get away with no sources for a while, but you can not. I hope this helps. Please consider it carefully. Also please sign you comments on talk page by adding 4 tildas ~~~~. For me it gives what follows here. Bduke 08:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
There is now a separate page for List of social science journals. But since others will probably ask, I just put in a section with the reference. The section seems underpopulated--if you know what should go in, could you add them. DGG 19:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Greetings. The article list of our interest has been moved to a new wikiproject page. The new title is called the >>> List of articles related to scientific skepiticism. If you have any suggestions for improvement just let me know. The movement forward will be focusing, direction, and quality info. Sincerely, -- QuackGuru 03:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I have explained my reasoning for the little Elsevier/Endeavour edit at Talk:Elsevier/Archives/2014#The_flagship_Endeavor.2FEndeavour. Cheers Nurg 05:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I felt so frustrated with being asked to provide an endless number of sources, which were then rejected by people unable to get free of their personal POV, that when all the entries in that list were deleted (at the very moment I was building a requested source's details) that I lost it and let loose with a major rant on the WikiProject Philosophy's talk page. I'd be interested in your take on what I've said. Best Wishes, Steve 09:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Budke,
I got your email. Thank you. I'll try to discuss it in here and not in email since other will be probably interested too. Thanks, APH 08:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC) PS. When I sign with tildas my user name is written but without a link to my page. Do you happen to know why?
Thanks so much for your attempt to help here. A very constructive effort. -- Fyslee 10:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Either I've completely lost my mind, or I'm dealing with an invariably insulting editor who has an advanced degree in chemistry, yet really doesn't understand key parts of the physics of the subject. So, I'm asking for some badly needed RfC on the chem section of this article. I'm leaving an identical message for user:smokefoot and everybody else with a chem degree I can think of. Gracias for the outside view. S B H arris 09:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
And by the way, most chemists don't react to the idea that chemistry is a branch of physics; they just nod. It's only when you say chemistry is JUST a branch of physics... S B H arris 12:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
The only efficient way to get impact factors is from Journal citation reports: all listings are derived from that, there is no other source. Various universities do various things with off campus access, and it the university has it and you can't get it you should ask. They will say some nonsense about licenses, but in the ISI standard license all authorized users of the library have access in the library, though not necessarily outside. You could copy the chemistry list for example, and use individual numbers from it. (the current ones are for 05; 06 not until next august) I would not post the list, for it is copyright & they enforce it.
The other way is to look on individual journal home pages, most journals with high impact factors advertise them. You can search in google for "journal name "impact factor ", both in quotes. If you do this make sure you get ones specifically for 2005. There will also be a few pirated lists showing up, for earlier years, but all the pirate versions with 2005 numbers I know of have been taken down.
Once you have verified an impact factor, give the reference as Journal Citation Reports" (2005) or else the link to the publishers home page as [http//...html 2005 impact factor from publisher's site] . Anyone challenges that, let me know.
Or you can ask a friendly librarian somewhere to send you a list. They should not send the whole thing, but excerpts are probably permissible as fair use response to reference questions. DGG 21:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Notability is of course more difficult. I am trying to establish the position that all peer-reviewed journals listed in standard indexes are notable. The standard index for chem is of course CAS, and this is not available off campus to anyone from anywhere; the journal list is CASSI, and I think ditto. However, almost all organic chem journals & many others are in PubMed, and the link for their journal list is http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=journals. Use the NLM catalog links display for the full information. since PubMed is a selective listing--though a broad one--this is not subject to the criticism of lists giving only unselected directory information. I do not think it would be challenged.
But I do not think it would be a good idea to add Indexed in: ABC routinely to articles, because this will end up with thousands of links to the Chemical Abstracts page, etc. Publishers sites will sometimes list rank, but I am prepared to find this for individual titles if there are problems. I do not think the rank should go in the articles about the journal, but be used only to defend notability. The relevant rank is for the category, such as Chemistry, Organic, and should be stated as no.5 out of 250 or whatever. Let me know if there are any challenges.
I will post this all somewhere, probably on a subpage of my user page.
One thing I would absolutely avoid is putting whatever ISI IF information anywhere except individual pages--putting it in the list of chem journals is almost certainly a copyright violation. DGG 22:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for contributing to Wikipedia:GFDL Compliance. I noticed you said you couldn't find contact info. In the future, try looking the site up on whois. There are programs you can get, or you can use sites like http://whois.net . Thanks. Superm401 - Talk 08:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
OK. Thanks, Jergen. I am rather tied up today but should be able to get around to starting things off tomorrow. Remember I am on the other side of the world. It is 10.45 a.m. here. I will however add a brief comment on the translations page. -- Bduke 23:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Message posted on multiple user pages: as you've been a figure to some degree in the multi-article, Rand-related dispute involving SteveWolfer, I thought it would be appropriate to let you know that I've initiated an RFC on him. You are invited to join in the proceedings if you are so inclined. Simões ( talk/ contribs) 22:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi bduke, I answered to your request on the above page. I agree to mediation continueing, but with 2 side notes (discussion has to be on-wiki and the new user must promise not to move in the mean time). -- Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 17:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I sent you a email at the end of last week through the link in your user page. did the attachment come through? reply thru my email if you prefer14:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if I am to be included in this, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting/Translations#Project_mediator_offer. I am not a member of the Scouting WikiProject. I guess I'd like to be listed as an observer on Evrik's side. English Subtitle 22:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The training system changed considerably just a few years ago - the preliminary training is done in a couple of modules which last about a day, and you are expected to complete those within the first five months of holding a warrant - the other twenty modules to get Wood Badge are what it is talking about as "appropriate training" in POR. ADC (Training) was replaced with Local Training Managers and Administrators with the rest of the changes. Horus Kol 14:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I shall add some comments about relative position. Perhaps we should start challenging the reliability of the sources used for some other subjects. Rather than foolishly pick a incontestably notable one, I will look for a truly dubious example. DGG 00:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)00:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wine member:
There is an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wine#Vintage_Infos_.28part_II.29 that has become
Please add your comments/input to the talk page Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_is_not_a_wine_guide.
Thanks! Regards -- Steve.Moulding 20:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
How can I find article in which User:Conscious has contributed content?
Mikeguth 19:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I shortened the article on my father as per your suggestions on my talk page. I tried to include information that would be found in a World Book Encyclopedia article. Believe it or not, encyclopedia articles do talk about awards people receive. Mikeguth 01:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment to User:Bduke. Get off your high horse! I edited your discussion page that pertained only to me and my article on my father. I deleted the old material to keep the discussion current. Don't pretend that is vandalism. Do you think if you scribble some graffiti on a wall that makes it "art." Your words are not so precious that they should be commemorated for all time. Frankly, you really need to get your ego in check. I am wondering what type of personality is attracted to editing on Wikipedia. This is getting quite bizarre.
Second, I have followed your suggestions with respect to shortening the article on my father. I put in the GNU open source material notice at the bottom of my father's home page. I have really gone out of my way to accommodate your requests.
Mikeguth 16:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I replied on User talk:Mikeguth since he put the same material there. -- Bduke 20:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, just thought I'd let you know your AFD seems properly formed. While I'm not an admin, I do frequent WP:AFD and I can see no problems with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathew Chuk. Good work on correcting it. Cheers! The Rambling Man 08:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I think I got it fixed. I reverted the redirect, deleted the cut-and-paste page, and then moved the article to the new title. Check it and see if everything's ok and let me know. -- DanielCD 22:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Forgive me i seem to forget the earlier threads on this matter - this article has no offshoots at all and remains like that? Satu Suro 09:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Another week is gone by and still no statement by Evrik. Could you please ask him again for his comments? If he does not answer soon (within the next week) I propose to close the mediation. Until then I'll prepare a proposal on naming associations' articles; if we can't discuss it in the mediation. I'll put it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards for discussion. -- jergen 16:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Could you ask him again; he had nearly a month for his statement. -- jergen 14:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, there's a simple alternative solution: find an Isle of Man editor to fix up the portal. That should be twenty, thirty minutes of work. It doesn't have to update it regularly or anything, just expand the redlink sections so that it looks like an actual portal instead of a work-in-progress. I've asked around in a few spots. >Radiant< 08:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with the consensus that it is not notable, though I agree that the Troop page could be placed into the Group Page. More information is going to be added by users about the history of the troop and more information about different international events. For example Lord Badden Powel wrote to th troop congratulating it on successful set up. We were invited by the Prime Minister to vist 10 Downing Steet, and was personally given a tour of the area. The Rudolf Hess fact is notable also. We are one of the oldest surving troops in Glasgow (the 1st and 24th being obvously older) and are one of the most internationally active; we have had at least one or more representative of the troop at each of the world jamborees, with a large collection of Neckies and badges from most. We even have four boys heading as part of the Scotland/Glasgow contingent to this years Jamboree. With the wealth of information that I plan to put onto this page, making a Group page is probably the best comprmise, as the Greater Glasgow page would become filled with information about our group.
Also, this is the first Article I have started on Wiki and fully understand the Notability and Verification processes, but I have been editting on here for a very long time. No shooting the messenger from me. :) -- User:sheeldz 10.15 GMT
I am at present researching and gaining references to certain topics, including the age and the history of the troop as part of the troop's 95th anniversary. Currently awaiting images and sources from older members of the troop.-- sheeldz 11.57, 7 February 2007 (GMT)
I see that you have deleted the See also link to the Gang Show article. I can't think what you fellows have against its inclusion in the list. NIH I dare say is the reason. I don't why it is but some people get all proprietary about articles they have contributed to. What is it about the link that has raised your ire? Albatross2147 14:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
The image isn't in the public domain, I know that much. I'm unsure if fair use applies either. There appears to be a current push for free images when the subject is a living person. {{ fairusereplace}} has been appearing on a lot of living person biographies of late. -- Longhair\ talk 21:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
You have added "In Australia, Associate Professors are often addressed as Professor." to the Professor article. That hasn't been my experience. The assertion " the title of "Professor" is reserved in correspondence to full professors only; lecturers and readers are properly addressed by their academic qualification (Dr. for a Ph.D., D.Phil. etc. and Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms otherwise)." seems to cover what I would expect in an Australian context - however, perhaps I have so far missed out yet another Americanisation trend. Just a query - if it is indeed your experience happy to live with it. -- Golden Wattle talk 22:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to thank you for your help with Earl Mindell. I figured the scientific peer review would be best for the subsection, hence I added it, but thanks for putting it on that other board too. Have a good one! SERSeanCrane 05:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
You have sent me the following message on my talk page
"You added the second sentence. The first is talking about internal energy (U). The second is talking about chemical potential which is related to the Gibbs Free Energy (G). There is therefore no "Thus" about it. Your sentence does not follow from the first and is actually talking about something completed different. The sentence after the Gibbs-Duhem equation "However, the change in internal energy can also be construed as the change in chemical potential energy" is true only if chemical potential energy is used in the sense of this article, i.e. as internal energy and not as the chemical potential which is different. Roughly, spontaneous process go with a decrease in chemical potential, but that can be with an increase in internal energy - i.e. an endothermic reaction. The point about the Gibbs-Duhem equation and the chemical potential does need to be mentioned somewhere, but not here and then more as a "do not confuse this use of chemical potential energy with the chemical potential". --Bduke 07:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hallenrm"
Since you seem to be interested in the history of chemistry, I thought you might be interested in this new article. Itub 16:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I am curious if you would like to participate in our Wine Newsletter "Wiki Winos" feature which is a get to know you section of the new Wine Newsletter that we are trying to develop to foster more of a community sense within the wine project. The feature is a questionnaire that you are free to answer any or all questions on that is located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter/Wiki-Winos. Please post any response or feedback on my talk page. Thanks for your time and consideration! Agne Cheese/ Wine 13:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
![]() Issue I - February 18, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
The project has reached the quarter-way point for the work on the list of the oldest 1000 ("abandoned") articles in Wikipedia: 250 articles have been reviewed and updated!
The project now has 21 members. If you're no longer interested, please take your name off the list; you won't get any further messages like this one. On the other hand, if you're still interested, please consider signing up for a(nother) block of 10 articles to work on - if everyone did this, we'd be almost halfway through those 1000 articles!
Finally, please note that project approach has changed slightly - there is now a section for editors to place articles that need to be "adopted", or to adopt articles that need further work. This means that if you find an article in a block of ten that needs more work than you have time for, it has a place to be put.
-- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi - I have not much opinion but wondered what you thought of 1st Victoria Police Scottish? - yet another scouting group stub-- Golden Wattle talk 23:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
It's been a week since my recent request for adminship passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) – riana_ dzasta 08:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry mate but I didn't edit or even visit a page on " Woodend". The town's a hole and I've never been there in my life. Although I did post some new information on Jak PSP and it was removed. {added by User:138.217.105.220, 07:21, (AEDT) 23 February 2007}
Thanks for the rfa support. Glad you are a part of the Scouting project and look forward to long happy wiki editing with you. PS: Please check out the Wood Badge FAC, it's gotten very little attention. Rlevse 03:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Bduke,
Please take a look here Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 28. By the way, I started contacting computer science experts, those that appear in our list, regarding the list. It receives many compliments as a valuable resource. I also ask them for entry to add (or remove). I received some addition and currently no removals. I'll keep updating you in the process. APH 06:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
-for excellent help, input, advice, and editing on a multitude of Scouting project tasks and skillful handling of our own mediation issues. Rlevse 21:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, Pete.Hurd 02:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
![]() Issue II - March 4th, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
I hear your letter. My interest is in Honduras. If I find anything relevant I will comment though I am intrigued. We wouldnt write Al-Qaeda in Arabic (to give an example of a different type of organisation) for obvious reasons and I am not at all sure we should be writing scout organisations in their own languages. Presumably we dont for Russian scout groups etc, SqueakBox 15:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
The guy who first proposed the project seems to be gone. I took the initiative to activate the project above in his absence, as I personally guess you all have enough members to give it a go. Good luck. John Carter 18:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I think the case is not yet closed. There has not been any edit to the article List of World Heritage Sites in danger since user FatCatIL will just keep on revising it and insisting on a political overtone of the article (i.e. the user keeps on including the line that the site of Jerusalem now "belongs to Israel"--refer to the user's contribution for details). Although this might be true politically (or might be debatable, depending on the party you're talking to), the article is primarily focused on the World Heritage Site program. And in this program, UNESCO addresses this delicate political situation by not delving into it (i.e. the "State Party" of Jerusalem is itself)--hence, it is akin to its goal of cooperation to save these monuments, instead of dividing countries by such political debates. The user FatCatIL, by including the clause of ownership, clearly does not realize this. And knowing that wikipedia articles should present objective, neutral point-of-views, and that our proposal is based merely on the official stand by UNESCO regarding its own program (refer to its official website: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list), then we might have a problem if FatCatIL will continue to insist on a separate version with a biased point-of-view. I hope you can help resolve this issue. Joey80 01:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
The issue is that the names are conflicting. I'm going to add another parameter to the template in a minute, which will make it work. - Amarkov moo! 05:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
When accepting WP:MEDCAB cases, please don't forget to set the status from "new" to "open". You forgot to change the template for this case. Cheers!! Vassyana 12:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent contribution to WikiProject Backpacking. In light of your expertice, I'd like to invite you to join the project, if you'd like, click below and add your name to accept!
Thanks, Brian, I've seen enough stuff deleted to last me a while. I am sorry if I sounded bitter the other day. I always try to back all of you as best I can when it is something near to you, and while I know not everything can be saved, I would never put salt in the wound when something important is deleted. Sometimes I get too attached. That was one of my articles I started before I lost Sheri. Someday someone is going to decide that all of the Wikipedia is in violation of something, and it will all get deleted and we'll lose everything, meanwhile I do what I can. Chris 01:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou for your support for keeping the Howells article alive on Wikipedia. I am trying to find more sources but this is difficult when one is writing about a Welsh store from London with few resources available. I shall do my best to find more sources. Thankyou once again, I am indebted to you. Sheep21 02:50, 18 March 2007
![]() Issue III - March 18, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
Hi Brian, recently I have been involved in investigating a bit of pseudo-science relating to "HHO gas", "Aquygen", "Brown's gas", "Magnecular bond" (the list goes on). These articles have had a heck of a time on Afd for a variety of reasons, so I have been trying to work out what is going on here. Two of my articles have stuck ( Institute for Basic Research and Ruggero Santilli), and I would like to continue to fill in the picture around this pseudo-science to hopefully nip it in the bud or at least demystify it. A rough overview can be seen on DRV, but I am not so interested in keeping those articles specifically. I went in search of "common ducted electrolysis" as all of the people related to these funky gases take it for granted that "common ducted electrolysis" is a well established process; I was surprised to find there is little information on it. Is it known by another name? Could you point me towards some reading material? Cheers, John Vandenberg 03:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
We have been discussing the status of UK readers from time to time, and lets try to figure out how to settle it. (At least for some particular subject, like Chemistry.) Perhaps you can point me to some relevant bios with the successive steps and years? I'm also going to ask about this on what I consider the best of all possible RSs, the CHMINF discussion list. As an example , A. Doyle's record of publications is typical of an Assistant Professor soon ready for tenure as an Associate professor, at a US Research university, depending on the University--probably not at the top level, like Cornell or Ohio State. I am perfectly willing to be convinced. Let's centralize it here. DGG 04:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I'm very new here. I believe I found a page that should be deleted. It's the page called Tanner Agle. I did what I thought I should based on what I read on the policies. I'm still unsure what I'm doing is right. (The author takes down the notice and adds even more nonsense.) I'm better with correcting comma usage and such, so I'll hand this issue over to you if that's OK. Well, it looks like you know what to do with it anyway! I'm keeping this page on my watch list so I know if you respond. Thank you. -- Donignacio 23:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
The fifth meetup of Melbourne Wikipedians is being planned as a breakfast meeting in the city with Jimbo Wales (at a venue to be arranged) on Friday, 27 April 2007.
Jimbo has proposed breakfast as the one real window of opportunity during his tightly scheduled stay in Melbourne. Tbe precise time has to be sorted out with Jimbo, but the arrangements for the equivalent Adelaide meetup a few days before may give a good idea.
Feel free to edit the relevant page in any way that might be helpful. I feel like a bit of an interloper, not having attended previous meetups. If there's anything you can do to help, I'll be grateful. Please think about whether you'll be able to make it, assuming the arrangements are similar to those Adelaide is adopting (i.e. a block of time with people being fairly free to arrive when it suits them). Some indication on the page of your possible participation would be really helpful. Metamagician3000 06:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi
I'm writing in reference to your removal of my addition of Rosanna Cubs and my removal of Diamond Valley Cubs on the Scout item on Wikipedia.
You commented that removal of other's sites was unfriendly... I would rather you'd asked me first or at least had a look at the sites concerned. Both are my sites... I was the CSL at Diamond Valley and recently moved to start a new Pack - Rosanna. The site went with me. If you look at www.diamondvalleycubs.org, you'll see it's now just one page, with the Cub content referring to Rosanna Cubs.
The link to Diamond Valley Cubs was happily sitting there for a year or so. I'd like to think that I could replace it with the www.rosannacubs.org ( Rosanna Cub Scouts ) link.
Regards
Wayne Renfrew CSL Rosanna Cub Scouts akela@rosannacubs.org
This was on Scouting in Victoria. I may have been a bit hasty. It looked as if you had added a link to one pack but removed somebody else's link. However, the real question is whether there should be any link there to a pack. Adding a link to a single pack or troop is considered by some people to be spam. It does not meet the guidelines for external links. It certainly would not be OK to have a link to every pack, troop, unit, crew etc. in Victoria, so why should there just be a link to your pack? The link may have been there for a year, but I do not think it should be there. -- Bduke 13:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comment about a single link.... I never envisaged that mine would be the only one... simply a case of you've got to start somewhere.
As for guidelines for external links.... the site is "Scouting in Victoria"... and links to Groups/Sections in Vic would seem to me, to be links specifically regarding Scouting in Victoria. You'll never get links to every one... only those who have an interest in being added.... and given that they're still meeting the description of Scouting in Victoria... why is it a problem?
Anyway, for the moment I've added Rosanna Cubs back in and also put in a couple of headings (State and Groups/Sections)... to make it clearer.
If you or your mate decide to delete it again, I'm not going to sit there forever adding as you delete. My view on Scouting AND Wikipedia is accomodation of a variety of views and a breadth of information. This is my first try at getting involved in Wikipedia and I must say a disappointing one, given the arbitray shutdown of views that don't concur, but are nevertheless not necessarily wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:220.237.171.123 ( talk • contribs) - I think User:Wrenfrew
I had to go and look at the edit history to see what you meant by "your mate". User:Maelgwn lives in Adelaide and does edit articles on Scouting in Australia. I had not seen your edits or hers(?) when I noticed and corrected the section on the jamboree just before going to bed. The headings in "External links are not acceptable as these links are not necessarily restricted to the ones you have. Such sub heading are not normal. Indeed, they are very rare and I have only seen them when there is a very long list of external links. The guideline you need to read is Wikipedia:External links. I think sites for packs come under "Not directly related .." but there are maybe other relevant clauses. I'm sorry your experience of Wikipedia is disappointing. The site is complex. There are 1.7 plus million articles. We have a lot of policies and guidelines to follow. Let me make a few suggestions. It is good you now have an account, although you did not use it for the edit above. When you have an account, someone will welcome you on your user talk page with a formal introduction but it does have some good links. I have just done that adding the welcome to User talk:Wrenfrew. Since you are interested in Scouting, why not look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting. That has sub pages that give the collective wisdom of Scout editors about what should be included and what not included. When adding messages to talk pages you should sign your contribution with ~~~~. For me that gives - Bduke 23:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Roy McWeeny, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://pubs.rsc.org/ScienceAndTechnology/AwardsAndFunding/CurrentWinners/SpiersMemorialMedal.asp, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:
It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Roy McWeeny/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Roy McWeeny saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Whpq 00:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
![]() Issue IV - April 1st, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
hi there sir, how was working at lancaster uni? i almost went there.
I would have been inclined to respond to you if you were a registered user. It is not always clear that unregistered users see changes to their IP address talk page. I reverted your edits because they were not encyclopedic material, being about yourself, and they disrupted the flow of the article. You would have enjoyed Lancaster. I did in its early days. I am sorry you did not get into Oxbridge. However I can assure you that my family, while quite bright, were working class and not well educated. I'm sure you will get a good university education somewhere else. I think you could also be a good contributor to Wikipedia. Take care. -- Bduke 03:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind comments given the circumstances. I have just read your userpage and might I say I a have great respect for your academic achievements. Just out of interest what motivated you to go and work at Bayero University? Also, Just out of interest, I was wondering what your greatest achievement as an academic has been. Sorry for all the questions but im soon off to university myself and im quite curious as it’s all a completely new and unfamiliar world to me. I didn’t even know what an academic journal was until recently!
Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.70.176 ( talk • contribs)
First, please get an account and stop vandalising pages. I see you have got into all kinds of trouble while I took a break. Also sign your contributions on talk pages with ~~~~. I went to Bayero University as I was given the opportunity to start a new department. I much enjoyed it and that was probably my greatest achievement as an academic. OK, I wrote a lot of papers and still write a few, but none are anything to write home about. Which university are you going to? -- Bduke 04:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
I award you The Working Man's Barnstar for your tireless work on Australian AfD sorting. I am much appreciative of all the work you have put in to sorting Aussie AfD debates for a long time, and it is past due that you recieve some acknowledgement for your endless work. I find the AfD box at the Aus noticeboard extremely helpful, and I'm sure others do too. Thanks for all your hard work! Daniel Bryant 07:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
![]() |
The
Wine Project Newsletter! Issue V - April 15, 2007 |
|
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. If you have any Wikipedia wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter. |
See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. -- Kevin Murray 23:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Lol. Sorry. It looked like the back of the shopping centre on the left but I must've been mistaken. I'll change it. Chicken7 00:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
There's actual nothing to merge in that article - when I get to Lancashire article, it will be listed like all the other groups. I say, let it go. -- Horus Kol Talk 06:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
There is no history section for this article, could you write a short one or simply tell me what the start date is for this branch of chemistry? Thanks: -- Sadi Carnot 02:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
For your interest and support of the new NT project - hopefully it will prosper with the level of enthusiasm shown so far Satu Suro 10:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree that Category:Old Blues could be improved on. I should prefer Category:Christ's Hospital Old Blues, as that includes the name used, without any ambiguity. Your Category:Christ's Hospital alumni would not be in line with the pattern for English School alumni - almost all of those subcategories are named on the pattern of Old Northpolians. Xn4 23:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Bduke.
Yes, I am the developer of STR3DI32, which is freely available to all academics, students, and other users of molecular modeling methods.
There is no financial gain for me here, and the papers that I cite as references show that I have been a researcher in theoretical chemistry for quite a number of years. I don't need to promote myself since my academic research and papers speak for themselves.
I am sure that you are well aware that it easy to create the illusion of unanimity on a subject by using one artifice, or another, to exclude conflicting views on that subject (censoring?).
I happen to have strong experimental evidence, and strong theoretical evidence, that contradict the validity and efficacy of the delocalization (hyperconjugation) theory of the anomeric effect. The supporters of the hyperconjugation theory, of course, do not like the criticism, but it is my duty, as a chemist and researcher to put my views out there for the entire scientific community to read and judge for themselves. The phlogiston theory was only upset because ALL scientists with an interest in that area were free to think about it, and to publish their works and thoughts.
Our job, as authors, is to create awareness in the minds of the scientific community at large. No single one of us knows enough to be able to exclude other people's ideas, but we can certainly expose the community to ALL of the ideas so that discussion, and scientific thought will eventually lead us in the right direction.
I do hope that we can continue to work together for the benefit of all. best wishes. Vgsbox 20:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I do not really disagree with anything you say and I am sure we can work together. I had not even read your article on the anomeric effect until just now. I fixed your references. You have to have "author=X" for the first author and "coathors=YZ" for the other authors. Otherwise no names appear in the reference section. My only concern is your comment above that "it is my duty, as a chemist and researcher to put my views out there for the entire scientific community to read and judge for themselves". Of course, in the scientific literature, but most wikipedians would say "not on Wikipedia". It is too close to original research and a possible conflict of interest. However, I have to say that you have done a good job at presenting the different views and have, by and large, reached a neutral point of view. I think the very last sentence needs a reference to an independent source, that has reviewed your work and the earlier theory. Could you have a look at Computational chemistry and in particular at the section on "Molecular mechanics"? That section needs expanding and it needs an example like the one on ab initio methods. I'd like to see that article confirmed as a good article (it was proposed years ago when standards were lower, and has been extensively chnaged since then) and possibly become a featured article. -- Bduke 23:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Do you have a ref for the cite needed tag here in the last para: Influences? I found one for Canada, but not Britain, though the Canada one could use one saying it doesn't prohibit atheists. Rlevse 12:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Whether this category should be in Category:Currencies of Oceania or in Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific, which is a parent of the first one, should be discussed on Category Talk:Currencies of Australia. Can we avoid an edit war? -- Bduke 03:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Should this The Wolf Cub's Handbook be merged somewhere or tagged for expanding? I think we have something related to it somewhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rlevse ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC).
I've done some work on this lately. Can you look at the Australia and UK parts of it for improvement? I'd like to go for GA soon. I'll be adding too. It definitely needs more wikilinks and refs. Rlevse 11:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Brian, Bentiromide (data page) has come up for deletion today, and while it looks like these "(data pages)" are normal, I dont know much about how the norms on displaying chemical data on WP. I was hoping to list it on a deletion sorting page watched by members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry, but I couldnt find the appropriate page so I've listed it on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Science. Could you take a look? Cheers, John. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jayvdb ( talk • contribs) 09:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC).
Bduke, I appreciate your additions to the Molecular orbital theory, but I have two suggestions regarding references. Yes I like seeing page references, but doing this in Wikipedia, as far as I know, gives a cluttered, redundant look to the reference section, e.g. see: Molecular orbital theory#References as you have it. Specific page references seem to only work good in when used in books. I thought it was a reference format typo when I saw it. Also, it is nice when people use the standard templates, such as:
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)This keeps all the references in Wikipedia uniform. Just some friendly suggestions. -- Sadi Carnot 00:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
To use pages, you would code your original ref:
To this (click the edit button to see the code):
Talk later, -- Sadi Carnot 02:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. The scout merit badge is for both the north and the south, its all one organisation for scouting ireland.
Hi! Thanks for the message!... In short, no - I'm not an English nationalist, but I can understand your point as this pops up from time to time... I'm unsure of your familiarity with the various naming conventions, guidelines and policies, but it is convention to use the constituent countries of the UK as the primary geographic reference frame, rather than the UK itself. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it satisfies most editors, most of the time (particularly the Scottish!), and is the most common approach on other encyclopedias.
I should add that the UK can certainly be added as an afternote, so long as the c.c. is also mentioned however.
I hope that explains things a little! Kindest regards, Jhamez84 23:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
It's true, they might rename it, but I figure it's a Wiki, and I didn't think following conventions strictly would be such a good idea for such an unwieldy name. Do you think making that category is a good idea? I just thought it would be a good idea to remove the "listiness" from that page. I'll hold off on adding more to that category for now. I just wanted to do some experiments with it for now.
I'm worried about the article itself though. It seems like a cut and paste of the original site, and I think it would be best to rewrite it completely. -- HappyCamper 02:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Added refs and removed tag. TimVickers 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Please look at the article Molecular Hamiltonian for molecular motions. Maybe you can make some useful additions/changes to this article. -- P.wormer 10:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Bduke,
You left a message for me on my talk page. Let me respond. I find it arrogant that you would hold yourself up to be judge of what is fit and not fit to be published on Wikipedia. You have no entry on Eugene Guth, despite his significant contributions to several branches of physices, and his pioneering contributions to polymer physics.
Who better to keep track of his scientific achievements than his own son? I find your reasoning here to be specious at best. If you can find one single error in any statement that I put into my father's biogrpahy, then by all means, challenge that point. I would love to match my IQ against yours and debate the content of my own father's biography with you.
It would be trivially easy for me to find a friend who would submit to Wikipedia the exact same article that I wrote verbatim. Would that take care of your perceived "conflict of interest"?
Wikipedia needs to look for the best sources available -- first-hand knowledge is always better than fourth-hand knowledge. If Wikipedia cannot find a way to edit articles without inflaming the contributors, then it is a sorry organization. There is no excuse for the way in which the article on my father was deleted without any notice to me. Some bozo graduate student in Russia has the power to get an article pulled? Shame. That is putting it mildly.
Mikeguth 03:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Hang on my friend. My comment on your talk page was about your edits to List of important publications in physics not about the article on your father. Those additions are still there, in spite of the fact that they do not follow the guidelines for that list since they do not properly give a description and a statement of importance. Nobody has touched them although they should. However these are not the only poor entries. There are many others that do not follow the guidelines. The article on your father was tagged as a copyright violation by User:Conscious. I had nothing to do with it. Did you read that copyright notice. It tells you exactly what you have to do and you did not do it. I have read your remarks to User:Conscious. You are quite wrong. The article does not include fair use quotes. It copies stuff from an outside source. Wikipedia has to be fully open source. Although such violations are quite common (I fixed one only yesterday that has been there for a year so) they are still wrong and unacceptable. In you comments you also breach other Wikipedia guidelines showing a lack of civility ( WP:CIVIL). Calling a fellow editor a "bozo" is not acceptable. I am going to revert the changes to Eugene Guth and hope you will start again. Read the various policies, including Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, WP:BIO, Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and so on. Follow the WP guidelines and policies and you will be fine. If you do not, you will get angry as you obviously are and not understand what Wikipedia is and what it is not. -- Bduke 05:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
My latest revision of the article on my father did not contain one single quotation from an outside source. And yet you, or some other administrator, AGAIN removed it as a copyright infringement. Explain to me how an article without one single quotation from an outside work and merely summarizing scientific knowledge in the public domain (available in many different sources) is a copyright infringement?
User:Conscious is just a user -- he is not tagged or indicated as an "Editor." Frankly, I would be astounded if Wikipedia chose a graduate student in physics to be the Editor of scientific biographies.
I am not wrong about fair use. I am an attorney at law. I know the fair use doctrine far better than a Chemist in Australia. As to civility, when you take down an article without any notice to the original contributor, I believe a reasonable person would expect a sharp reaction. User:Conscious can deal with that, if you are not the person who took down my father's biographical sketch.
06:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC) (above added by User:Mikeguth)
I did indeed revert back to the version that contained the copyvio tag. I told you I was going to. As I said, you need to read the copyvio tag. It does not say that you can fix the article by reverting back to where it was before. It says:-
I am not an administrator. You have to convince one. OK, you are an attorney at law. Do you understand the license that all wikipedia articles are released under? Was nothing on your article copied word for word from an outside document such as a university web site on your father? The list of awards and prizes looked exactly like that. You can not copy stuff from elsewhere unless it islicensed under the GNU Free Documentation License or a very similar free license. This is not the same as "public domain".
You say:-
This just shows how profoundly you do not understand wikipedia. Wikipedia does not have editors as opposed to users. You can edit any article, even if you do not register. Wikipedia does not chose anybody to edit scientific biographies, or indeed any article. You seem also to be unclear who did what to the artcile. Click on the history tag at the top of the Eugene Guth page. That shows you who has edited the page and when.
Now I do think that you father should have an article. Will you allow me to advise and mentor you? This is my advice. First calm down and read some of the policies and guidelines. Second, recognise that you do have a conflict of interest. This is obvious. You are his son. Read WP:COI. Third, you can create and edit the article on your father but you have to be particularly careful. Then read WP:BIO, WP:NPOV and WP:OR. You have to write from a neutral point of view. You can not do original research. That means you can not add anything to the article that you know only because you are his son. Then click on the history and bring up the last version you wrote. It is the link to "15:08, 13 January 2007" in the second line. Click on edit and highlight the whole lot. Save everything to the clipboard with Contrl:C. Do not save. Cancel the edit and go back to the current version with the copyvio tag. Click on the link it says is a temporary subpage. Put the material you saved in the edit window with Contrl:V. Edit it on the subpage until you are happy. The version you left was a mess. The images did not appear for example. Then let me know. Give me the full URL to the temp subpage. I'll look at it amd then I'll find an administrator to fix it for you. Once in place I and others can help you improve it. Some other advice. Do not include a long list of awards. Just add the most important. Do not add a list of publications. Read some other biographies of scientists and see how they are written. Read Wikipedia:WikiProject Academics for some suggestions on this. Above all remember that everything in the article must be referenced to verifiable outside sources. This is where you have to be particularly carefull as his son. Someone else perhaps could get away with no sources for a while, but you can not. I hope this helps. Please consider it carefully. Also please sign you comments on talk page by adding 4 tildas ~~~~. For me it gives what follows here. Bduke 08:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
There is now a separate page for List of social science journals. But since others will probably ask, I just put in a section with the reference. The section seems underpopulated--if you know what should go in, could you add them. DGG 19:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Greetings. The article list of our interest has been moved to a new wikiproject page. The new title is called the >>> List of articles related to scientific skepiticism. If you have any suggestions for improvement just let me know. The movement forward will be focusing, direction, and quality info. Sincerely, -- QuackGuru 03:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I have explained my reasoning for the little Elsevier/Endeavour edit at Talk:Elsevier/Archives/2014#The_flagship_Endeavor.2FEndeavour. Cheers Nurg 05:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I felt so frustrated with being asked to provide an endless number of sources, which were then rejected by people unable to get free of their personal POV, that when all the entries in that list were deleted (at the very moment I was building a requested source's details) that I lost it and let loose with a major rant on the WikiProject Philosophy's talk page. I'd be interested in your take on what I've said. Best Wishes, Steve 09:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Budke,
I got your email. Thank you. I'll try to discuss it in here and not in email since other will be probably interested too. Thanks, APH 08:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC) PS. When I sign with tildas my user name is written but without a link to my page. Do you happen to know why?
Thanks so much for your attempt to help here. A very constructive effort. -- Fyslee 10:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Either I've completely lost my mind, or I'm dealing with an invariably insulting editor who has an advanced degree in chemistry, yet really doesn't understand key parts of the physics of the subject. So, I'm asking for some badly needed RfC on the chem section of this article. I'm leaving an identical message for user:smokefoot and everybody else with a chem degree I can think of. Gracias for the outside view. S B H arris 09:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
And by the way, most chemists don't react to the idea that chemistry is a branch of physics; they just nod. It's only when you say chemistry is JUST a branch of physics... S B H arris 12:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
The only efficient way to get impact factors is from Journal citation reports: all listings are derived from that, there is no other source. Various universities do various things with off campus access, and it the university has it and you can't get it you should ask. They will say some nonsense about licenses, but in the ISI standard license all authorized users of the library have access in the library, though not necessarily outside. You could copy the chemistry list for example, and use individual numbers from it. (the current ones are for 05; 06 not until next august) I would not post the list, for it is copyright & they enforce it.
The other way is to look on individual journal home pages, most journals with high impact factors advertise them. You can search in google for "journal name "impact factor ", both in quotes. If you do this make sure you get ones specifically for 2005. There will also be a few pirated lists showing up, for earlier years, but all the pirate versions with 2005 numbers I know of have been taken down.
Once you have verified an impact factor, give the reference as Journal Citation Reports" (2005) or else the link to the publishers home page as [http//...html 2005 impact factor from publisher's site] . Anyone challenges that, let me know.
Or you can ask a friendly librarian somewhere to send you a list. They should not send the whole thing, but excerpts are probably permissible as fair use response to reference questions. DGG 21:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Notability is of course more difficult. I am trying to establish the position that all peer-reviewed journals listed in standard indexes are notable. The standard index for chem is of course CAS, and this is not available off campus to anyone from anywhere; the journal list is CASSI, and I think ditto. However, almost all organic chem journals & many others are in PubMed, and the link for their journal list is http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=journals. Use the NLM catalog links display for the full information. since PubMed is a selective listing--though a broad one--this is not subject to the criticism of lists giving only unselected directory information. I do not think it would be challenged.
But I do not think it would be a good idea to add Indexed in: ABC routinely to articles, because this will end up with thousands of links to the Chemical Abstracts page, etc. Publishers sites will sometimes list rank, but I am prepared to find this for individual titles if there are problems. I do not think the rank should go in the articles about the journal, but be used only to defend notability. The relevant rank is for the category, such as Chemistry, Organic, and should be stated as no.5 out of 250 or whatever. Let me know if there are any challenges.
I will post this all somewhere, probably on a subpage of my user page.
One thing I would absolutely avoid is putting whatever ISI IF information anywhere except individual pages--putting it in the list of chem journals is almost certainly a copyright violation. DGG 22:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for contributing to Wikipedia:GFDL Compliance. I noticed you said you couldn't find contact info. In the future, try looking the site up on whois. There are programs you can get, or you can use sites like http://whois.net . Thanks. Superm401 - Talk 08:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
OK. Thanks, Jergen. I am rather tied up today but should be able to get around to starting things off tomorrow. Remember I am on the other side of the world. It is 10.45 a.m. here. I will however add a brief comment on the translations page. -- Bduke 23:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Message posted on multiple user pages: as you've been a figure to some degree in the multi-article, Rand-related dispute involving SteveWolfer, I thought it would be appropriate to let you know that I've initiated an RFC on him. You are invited to join in the proceedings if you are so inclined. Simões ( talk/ contribs) 22:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi bduke, I answered to your request on the above page. I agree to mediation continueing, but with 2 side notes (discussion has to be on-wiki and the new user must promise not to move in the mean time). -- Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 17:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I sent you a email at the end of last week through the link in your user page. did the attachment come through? reply thru my email if you prefer14:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if I am to be included in this, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting/Translations#Project_mediator_offer. I am not a member of the Scouting WikiProject. I guess I'd like to be listed as an observer on Evrik's side. English Subtitle 22:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The training system changed considerably just a few years ago - the preliminary training is done in a couple of modules which last about a day, and you are expected to complete those within the first five months of holding a warrant - the other twenty modules to get Wood Badge are what it is talking about as "appropriate training" in POR. ADC (Training) was replaced with Local Training Managers and Administrators with the rest of the changes. Horus Kol 14:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I shall add some comments about relative position. Perhaps we should start challenging the reliability of the sources used for some other subjects. Rather than foolishly pick a incontestably notable one, I will look for a truly dubious example. DGG 00:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)00:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wine member:
There is an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wine#Vintage_Infos_.28part_II.29 that has become
Please add your comments/input to the talk page Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_is_not_a_wine_guide.
Thanks! Regards -- Steve.Moulding 20:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
How can I find article in which User:Conscious has contributed content?
Mikeguth 19:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I shortened the article on my father as per your suggestions on my talk page. I tried to include information that would be found in a World Book Encyclopedia article. Believe it or not, encyclopedia articles do talk about awards people receive. Mikeguth 01:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment to User:Bduke. Get off your high horse! I edited your discussion page that pertained only to me and my article on my father. I deleted the old material to keep the discussion current. Don't pretend that is vandalism. Do you think if you scribble some graffiti on a wall that makes it "art." Your words are not so precious that they should be commemorated for all time. Frankly, you really need to get your ego in check. I am wondering what type of personality is attracted to editing on Wikipedia. This is getting quite bizarre.
Second, I have followed your suggestions with respect to shortening the article on my father. I put in the GNU open source material notice at the bottom of my father's home page. I have really gone out of my way to accommodate your requests.
Mikeguth 16:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I replied on User talk:Mikeguth since he put the same material there. -- Bduke 20:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, just thought I'd let you know your AFD seems properly formed. While I'm not an admin, I do frequent WP:AFD and I can see no problems with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathew Chuk. Good work on correcting it. Cheers! The Rambling Man 08:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I think I got it fixed. I reverted the redirect, deleted the cut-and-paste page, and then moved the article to the new title. Check it and see if everything's ok and let me know. -- DanielCD 22:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Forgive me i seem to forget the earlier threads on this matter - this article has no offshoots at all and remains like that? Satu Suro 09:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Another week is gone by and still no statement by Evrik. Could you please ask him again for his comments? If he does not answer soon (within the next week) I propose to close the mediation. Until then I'll prepare a proposal on naming associations' articles; if we can't discuss it in the mediation. I'll put it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/RulesStandards for discussion. -- jergen 16:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Could you ask him again; he had nearly a month for his statement. -- jergen 14:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, there's a simple alternative solution: find an Isle of Man editor to fix up the portal. That should be twenty, thirty minutes of work. It doesn't have to update it regularly or anything, just expand the redlink sections so that it looks like an actual portal instead of a work-in-progress. I've asked around in a few spots. >Radiant< 08:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with the consensus that it is not notable, though I agree that the Troop page could be placed into the Group Page. More information is going to be added by users about the history of the troop and more information about different international events. For example Lord Badden Powel wrote to th troop congratulating it on successful set up. We were invited by the Prime Minister to vist 10 Downing Steet, and was personally given a tour of the area. The Rudolf Hess fact is notable also. We are one of the oldest surving troops in Glasgow (the 1st and 24th being obvously older) and are one of the most internationally active; we have had at least one or more representative of the troop at each of the world jamborees, with a large collection of Neckies and badges from most. We even have four boys heading as part of the Scotland/Glasgow contingent to this years Jamboree. With the wealth of information that I plan to put onto this page, making a Group page is probably the best comprmise, as the Greater Glasgow page would become filled with information about our group.
Also, this is the first Article I have started on Wiki and fully understand the Notability and Verification processes, but I have been editting on here for a very long time. No shooting the messenger from me. :) -- User:sheeldz 10.15 GMT
I am at present researching and gaining references to certain topics, including the age and the history of the troop as part of the troop's 95th anniversary. Currently awaiting images and sources from older members of the troop.-- sheeldz 11.57, 7 February 2007 (GMT)
I see that you have deleted the See also link to the Gang Show article. I can't think what you fellows have against its inclusion in the list. NIH I dare say is the reason. I don't why it is but some people get all proprietary about articles they have contributed to. What is it about the link that has raised your ire? Albatross2147 14:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
The image isn't in the public domain, I know that much. I'm unsure if fair use applies either. There appears to be a current push for free images when the subject is a living person. {{ fairusereplace}} has been appearing on a lot of living person biographies of late. -- Longhair\ talk 21:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
You have added "In Australia, Associate Professors are often addressed as Professor." to the Professor article. That hasn't been my experience. The assertion " the title of "Professor" is reserved in correspondence to full professors only; lecturers and readers are properly addressed by their academic qualification (Dr. for a Ph.D., D.Phil. etc. and Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms otherwise)." seems to cover what I would expect in an Australian context - however, perhaps I have so far missed out yet another Americanisation trend. Just a query - if it is indeed your experience happy to live with it. -- Golden Wattle talk 22:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to thank you for your help with Earl Mindell. I figured the scientific peer review would be best for the subsection, hence I added it, but thanks for putting it on that other board too. Have a good one! SERSeanCrane 05:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
You have sent me the following message on my talk page
"You added the second sentence. The first is talking about internal energy (U). The second is talking about chemical potential which is related to the Gibbs Free Energy (G). There is therefore no "Thus" about it. Your sentence does not follow from the first and is actually talking about something completed different. The sentence after the Gibbs-Duhem equation "However, the change in internal energy can also be construed as the change in chemical potential energy" is true only if chemical potential energy is used in the sense of this article, i.e. as internal energy and not as the chemical potential which is different. Roughly, spontaneous process go with a decrease in chemical potential, but that can be with an increase in internal energy - i.e. an endothermic reaction. The point about the Gibbs-Duhem equation and the chemical potential does need to be mentioned somewhere, but not here and then more as a "do not confuse this use of chemical potential energy with the chemical potential". --Bduke 07:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hallenrm"
Since you seem to be interested in the history of chemistry, I thought you might be interested in this new article. Itub 16:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I am curious if you would like to participate in our Wine Newsletter "Wiki Winos" feature which is a get to know you section of the new Wine Newsletter that we are trying to develop to foster more of a community sense within the wine project. The feature is a questionnaire that you are free to answer any or all questions on that is located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter/Wiki-Winos. Please post any response or feedback on my talk page. Thanks for your time and consideration! Agne Cheese/ Wine 13:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
![]() Issue I - February 18, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
The project has reached the quarter-way point for the work on the list of the oldest 1000 ("abandoned") articles in Wikipedia: 250 articles have been reviewed and updated!
The project now has 21 members. If you're no longer interested, please take your name off the list; you won't get any further messages like this one. On the other hand, if you're still interested, please consider signing up for a(nother) block of 10 articles to work on - if everyone did this, we'd be almost halfway through those 1000 articles!
Finally, please note that project approach has changed slightly - there is now a section for editors to place articles that need to be "adopted", or to adopt articles that need further work. This means that if you find an article in a block of ten that needs more work than you have time for, it has a place to be put.
-- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi - I have not much opinion but wondered what you thought of 1st Victoria Police Scottish? - yet another scouting group stub-- Golden Wattle talk 23:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
It's been a week since my recent request for adminship passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) – riana_ dzasta 08:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry mate but I didn't edit or even visit a page on " Woodend". The town's a hole and I've never been there in my life. Although I did post some new information on Jak PSP and it was removed. {added by User:138.217.105.220, 07:21, (AEDT) 23 February 2007}
Thanks for the rfa support. Glad you are a part of the Scouting project and look forward to long happy wiki editing with you. PS: Please check out the Wood Badge FAC, it's gotten very little attention. Rlevse 03:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Bduke,
Please take a look here Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 28. By the way, I started contacting computer science experts, those that appear in our list, regarding the list. It receives many compliments as a valuable resource. I also ask them for entry to add (or remove). I received some addition and currently no removals. I'll keep updating you in the process. APH 06:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
-for excellent help, input, advice, and editing on a multitude of Scouting project tasks and skillful handling of our own mediation issues. Rlevse 21:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Cheers, Pete.Hurd 02:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
![]() Issue II - March 4th, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
I hear your letter. My interest is in Honduras. If I find anything relevant I will comment though I am intrigued. We wouldnt write Al-Qaeda in Arabic (to give an example of a different type of organisation) for obvious reasons and I am not at all sure we should be writing scout organisations in their own languages. Presumably we dont for Russian scout groups etc, SqueakBox 15:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
The guy who first proposed the project seems to be gone. I took the initiative to activate the project above in his absence, as I personally guess you all have enough members to give it a go. Good luck. John Carter 18:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I think the case is not yet closed. There has not been any edit to the article List of World Heritage Sites in danger since user FatCatIL will just keep on revising it and insisting on a political overtone of the article (i.e. the user keeps on including the line that the site of Jerusalem now "belongs to Israel"--refer to the user's contribution for details). Although this might be true politically (or might be debatable, depending on the party you're talking to), the article is primarily focused on the World Heritage Site program. And in this program, UNESCO addresses this delicate political situation by not delving into it (i.e. the "State Party" of Jerusalem is itself)--hence, it is akin to its goal of cooperation to save these monuments, instead of dividing countries by such political debates. The user FatCatIL, by including the clause of ownership, clearly does not realize this. And knowing that wikipedia articles should present objective, neutral point-of-views, and that our proposal is based merely on the official stand by UNESCO regarding its own program (refer to its official website: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list), then we might have a problem if FatCatIL will continue to insist on a separate version with a biased point-of-view. I hope you can help resolve this issue. Joey80 01:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
The issue is that the names are conflicting. I'm going to add another parameter to the template in a minute, which will make it work. - Amarkov moo! 05:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
When accepting WP:MEDCAB cases, please don't forget to set the status from "new" to "open". You forgot to change the template for this case. Cheers!! Vassyana 12:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent contribution to WikiProject Backpacking. In light of your expertice, I'd like to invite you to join the project, if you'd like, click below and add your name to accept!
Thanks, Brian, I've seen enough stuff deleted to last me a while. I am sorry if I sounded bitter the other day. I always try to back all of you as best I can when it is something near to you, and while I know not everything can be saved, I would never put salt in the wound when something important is deleted. Sometimes I get too attached. That was one of my articles I started before I lost Sheri. Someday someone is going to decide that all of the Wikipedia is in violation of something, and it will all get deleted and we'll lose everything, meanwhile I do what I can. Chris 01:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou for your support for keeping the Howells article alive on Wikipedia. I am trying to find more sources but this is difficult when one is writing about a Welsh store from London with few resources available. I shall do my best to find more sources. Thankyou once again, I am indebted to you. Sheep21 02:50, 18 March 2007
![]() Issue III - March 18, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
Hi Brian, recently I have been involved in investigating a bit of pseudo-science relating to "HHO gas", "Aquygen", "Brown's gas", "Magnecular bond" (the list goes on). These articles have had a heck of a time on Afd for a variety of reasons, so I have been trying to work out what is going on here. Two of my articles have stuck ( Institute for Basic Research and Ruggero Santilli), and I would like to continue to fill in the picture around this pseudo-science to hopefully nip it in the bud or at least demystify it. A rough overview can be seen on DRV, but I am not so interested in keeping those articles specifically. I went in search of "common ducted electrolysis" as all of the people related to these funky gases take it for granted that "common ducted electrolysis" is a well established process; I was surprised to find there is little information on it. Is it known by another name? Could you point me towards some reading material? Cheers, John Vandenberg 03:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
We have been discussing the status of UK readers from time to time, and lets try to figure out how to settle it. (At least for some particular subject, like Chemistry.) Perhaps you can point me to some relevant bios with the successive steps and years? I'm also going to ask about this on what I consider the best of all possible RSs, the CHMINF discussion list. As an example , A. Doyle's record of publications is typical of an Assistant Professor soon ready for tenure as an Associate professor, at a US Research university, depending on the University--probably not at the top level, like Cornell or Ohio State. I am perfectly willing to be convinced. Let's centralize it here. DGG 04:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I'm very new here. I believe I found a page that should be deleted. It's the page called Tanner Agle. I did what I thought I should based on what I read on the policies. I'm still unsure what I'm doing is right. (The author takes down the notice and adds even more nonsense.) I'm better with correcting comma usage and such, so I'll hand this issue over to you if that's OK. Well, it looks like you know what to do with it anyway! I'm keeping this page on my watch list so I know if you respond. Thank you. -- Donignacio 23:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
The fifth meetup of Melbourne Wikipedians is being planned as a breakfast meeting in the city with Jimbo Wales (at a venue to be arranged) on Friday, 27 April 2007.
Jimbo has proposed breakfast as the one real window of opportunity during his tightly scheduled stay in Melbourne. Tbe precise time has to be sorted out with Jimbo, but the arrangements for the equivalent Adelaide meetup a few days before may give a good idea.
Feel free to edit the relevant page in any way that might be helpful. I feel like a bit of an interloper, not having attended previous meetups. If there's anything you can do to help, I'll be grateful. Please think about whether you'll be able to make it, assuming the arrangements are similar to those Adelaide is adopting (i.e. a block of time with people being fairly free to arrive when it suits them). Some indication on the page of your possible participation would be really helpful. Metamagician3000 06:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi
I'm writing in reference to your removal of my addition of Rosanna Cubs and my removal of Diamond Valley Cubs on the Scout item on Wikipedia.
You commented that removal of other's sites was unfriendly... I would rather you'd asked me first or at least had a look at the sites concerned. Both are my sites... I was the CSL at Diamond Valley and recently moved to start a new Pack - Rosanna. The site went with me. If you look at www.diamondvalleycubs.org, you'll see it's now just one page, with the Cub content referring to Rosanna Cubs.
The link to Diamond Valley Cubs was happily sitting there for a year or so. I'd like to think that I could replace it with the www.rosannacubs.org ( Rosanna Cub Scouts ) link.
Regards
Wayne Renfrew CSL Rosanna Cub Scouts akela@rosannacubs.org
This was on Scouting in Victoria. I may have been a bit hasty. It looked as if you had added a link to one pack but removed somebody else's link. However, the real question is whether there should be any link there to a pack. Adding a link to a single pack or troop is considered by some people to be spam. It does not meet the guidelines for external links. It certainly would not be OK to have a link to every pack, troop, unit, crew etc. in Victoria, so why should there just be a link to your pack? The link may have been there for a year, but I do not think it should be there. -- Bduke 13:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comment about a single link.... I never envisaged that mine would be the only one... simply a case of you've got to start somewhere.
As for guidelines for external links.... the site is "Scouting in Victoria"... and links to Groups/Sections in Vic would seem to me, to be links specifically regarding Scouting in Victoria. You'll never get links to every one... only those who have an interest in being added.... and given that they're still meeting the description of Scouting in Victoria... why is it a problem?
Anyway, for the moment I've added Rosanna Cubs back in and also put in a couple of headings (State and Groups/Sections)... to make it clearer.
If you or your mate decide to delete it again, I'm not going to sit there forever adding as you delete. My view on Scouting AND Wikipedia is accomodation of a variety of views and a breadth of information. This is my first try at getting involved in Wikipedia and I must say a disappointing one, given the arbitray shutdown of views that don't concur, but are nevertheless not necessarily wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:220.237.171.123 ( talk • contribs) - I think User:Wrenfrew
I had to go and look at the edit history to see what you meant by "your mate". User:Maelgwn lives in Adelaide and does edit articles on Scouting in Australia. I had not seen your edits or hers(?) when I noticed and corrected the section on the jamboree just before going to bed. The headings in "External links are not acceptable as these links are not necessarily restricted to the ones you have. Such sub heading are not normal. Indeed, they are very rare and I have only seen them when there is a very long list of external links. The guideline you need to read is Wikipedia:External links. I think sites for packs come under "Not directly related .." but there are maybe other relevant clauses. I'm sorry your experience of Wikipedia is disappointing. The site is complex. There are 1.7 plus million articles. We have a lot of policies and guidelines to follow. Let me make a few suggestions. It is good you now have an account, although you did not use it for the edit above. When you have an account, someone will welcome you on your user talk page with a formal introduction but it does have some good links. I have just done that adding the welcome to User talk:Wrenfrew. Since you are interested in Scouting, why not look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting. That has sub pages that give the collective wisdom of Scout editors about what should be included and what not included. When adding messages to talk pages you should sign your contribution with ~~~~. For me that gives - Bduke 23:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Roy McWeeny, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://pubs.rsc.org/ScienceAndTechnology/AwardsAndFunding/CurrentWinners/SpiersMemorialMedal.asp, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:
It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Roy McWeeny/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Roy McWeeny saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Whpq 00:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
![]() Issue IV - April 1st, 2007 | |
| |
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. |
hi there sir, how was working at lancaster uni? i almost went there.
I would have been inclined to respond to you if you were a registered user. It is not always clear that unregistered users see changes to their IP address talk page. I reverted your edits because they were not encyclopedic material, being about yourself, and they disrupted the flow of the article. You would have enjoyed Lancaster. I did in its early days. I am sorry you did not get into Oxbridge. However I can assure you that my family, while quite bright, were working class and not well educated. I'm sure you will get a good university education somewhere else. I think you could also be a good contributor to Wikipedia. Take care. -- Bduke 03:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind comments given the circumstances. I have just read your userpage and might I say I a have great respect for your academic achievements. Just out of interest what motivated you to go and work at Bayero University? Also, Just out of interest, I was wondering what your greatest achievement as an academic has been. Sorry for all the questions but im soon off to university myself and im quite curious as it’s all a completely new and unfamiliar world to me. I didn’t even know what an academic journal was until recently!
Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.70.176 ( talk • contribs)
First, please get an account and stop vandalising pages. I see you have got into all kinds of trouble while I took a break. Also sign your contributions on talk pages with ~~~~. I went to Bayero University as I was given the opportunity to start a new department. I much enjoyed it and that was probably my greatest achievement as an academic. OK, I wrote a lot of papers and still write a few, but none are anything to write home about. Which university are you going to? -- Bduke 04:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
I award you The Working Man's Barnstar for your tireless work on Australian AfD sorting. I am much appreciative of all the work you have put in to sorting Aussie AfD debates for a long time, and it is past due that you recieve some acknowledgement for your endless work. I find the AfD box at the Aus noticeboard extremely helpful, and I'm sure others do too. Thanks for all your hard work! Daniel Bryant 07:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
![]() |
The
Wine Project Newsletter! Issue V - April 15, 2007 |
|
This newsletter is sent to those listed under Participants on the Wine Project page. If you wish to no longer receive this newsletter please include Decline newsletter next to your name on the Participant list. If you have any Wikipedia wine related news, announcements or suggestions drop a note in the Comments/Suggestion area of Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter. |
See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. -- Kevin Murray 23:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Lol. Sorry. It looked like the back of the shopping centre on the left but I must've been mistaken. I'll change it. Chicken7 00:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
There's actual nothing to merge in that article - when I get to Lancashire article, it will be listed like all the other groups. I say, let it go. -- Horus Kol Talk 06:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
There is no history section for this article, could you write a short one or simply tell me what the start date is for this branch of chemistry? Thanks: -- Sadi Carnot 02:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
For your interest and support of the new NT project - hopefully it will prosper with the level of enthusiasm shown so far Satu Suro 10:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree that Category:Old Blues could be improved on. I should prefer Category:Christ's Hospital Old Blues, as that includes the name used, without any ambiguity. Your Category:Christ's Hospital alumni would not be in line with the pattern for English School alumni - almost all of those subcategories are named on the pattern of Old Northpolians. Xn4 23:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Bduke.
Yes, I am the developer of STR3DI32, which is freely available to all academics, students, and other users of molecular modeling methods.
There is no financial gain for me here, and the papers that I cite as references show that I have been a researcher in theoretical chemistry for quite a number of years. I don't need to promote myself since my academic research and papers speak for themselves.
I am sure that you are well aware that it easy to create the illusion of unanimity on a subject by using one artifice, or another, to exclude conflicting views on that subject (censoring?).
I happen to have strong experimental evidence, and strong theoretical evidence, that contradict the validity and efficacy of the delocalization (hyperconjugation) theory of the anomeric effect. The supporters of the hyperconjugation theory, of course, do not like the criticism, but it is my duty, as a chemist and researcher to put my views out there for the entire scientific community to read and judge for themselves. The phlogiston theory was only upset because ALL scientists with an interest in that area were free to think about it, and to publish their works and thoughts.
Our job, as authors, is to create awareness in the minds of the scientific community at large. No single one of us knows enough to be able to exclude other people's ideas, but we can certainly expose the community to ALL of the ideas so that discussion, and scientific thought will eventually lead us in the right direction.
I do hope that we can continue to work together for the benefit of all. best wishes. Vgsbox 20:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I do not really disagree with anything you say and I am sure we can work together. I had not even read your article on the anomeric effect until just now. I fixed your references. You have to have "author=X" for the first author and "coathors=YZ" for the other authors. Otherwise no names appear in the reference section. My only concern is your comment above that "it is my duty, as a chemist and researcher to put my views out there for the entire scientific community to read and judge for themselves". Of course, in the scientific literature, but most wikipedians would say "not on Wikipedia". It is too close to original research and a possible conflict of interest. However, I have to say that you have done a good job at presenting the different views and have, by and large, reached a neutral point of view. I think the very last sentence needs a reference to an independent source, that has reviewed your work and the earlier theory. Could you have a look at Computational chemistry and in particular at the section on "Molecular mechanics"? That section needs expanding and it needs an example like the one on ab initio methods. I'd like to see that article confirmed as a good article (it was proposed years ago when standards were lower, and has been extensively chnaged since then) and possibly become a featured article. -- Bduke 23:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Do you have a ref for the cite needed tag here in the last para: Influences? I found one for Canada, but not Britain, though the Canada one could use one saying it doesn't prohibit atheists. Rlevse 12:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)