![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Talk:Chinese room". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 1 October 2015.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee.
05:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation concerning Talk:Chinese room, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee,
TransporterMan (
TALK)
05:38, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
The vast majority of the material on the talk page for "Chinese Room" [ [1]] is not cited. You wrote on my talk page that discussing the topic is prohibited, yet that is exactly what you did on the page -- discussed the topic. Nn9888 ( talk) 03:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 12, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC) on behalf of L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Looie. I loved your analysis of FAC and importance at the time. I agree fully with It's better to have problematic featured articles about important topics than for all featured articles to be about trivia. I have the general view that the work on Wikipedia can and should be nudged toward the more important tasks. But these thoughts are evidently very controversial in the Wikipedia community. I would very much like to see a corner of Wikipedia where this be discussed in a positive spirit. My hope is also for SW support to provide feedback on importance and value. Such SW could consider for example number of links to articles in other languages, number of downloads the last quarter, subjective importance ranking. A a complement to editcount, a user could be able to se how much value they have added today, the last quarter. Such a figure could also be based on size of contribution, removal, reversing by others etc. Even if not perfect, such summary statistics could be much better than the current editcount. Do you know of any such discussion that you can point me to? -- Ettrig ( talk) 14:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are a party to the Genetically modified organisms arbitration case. The Arbitration Committee has enacted the following temporary injunction, to expire at the closure of the Genetically modified organisms arbitration case:
- Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to to genetically modified organisms and agricultural biotechnology, including glyphosate, broadly interpreted, for as long as this arbitration case remains open. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.
- Editors are prohibited from making more than one revert per page per day within the topic area found in part 1 of this injunction, subject to the usual exemptions.
For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) (via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:59, 6 October 2015 (UTC))
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archean, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greenstone. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Looie, do you still think GABA Tea is a good candidate for deletion? My first quick look is in agreement with you. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 23:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Looie496. A proposed decision has been posted for the Genetically modified organisms arbitration case, which you are listed as a party to. Comments about the proposed decision are welcome at the proposed decision talk page. Thank you. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:05, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Melanesia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sahul. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Louie, I came across your name at the new pages patrol page. As a result of this conversation (which you don't need to read) I have created a draft of a BLP in my sandbox. The notability is marginal so I'd like a second opinion before I publish it. When you have a moment could you take a look and tell me if you think the new article meets WP:MUSICBIO? The article draft is here. Thanking you in advance. Cheers! -- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:52, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Howdy. I'm guessing that you didn't notice the oldest link was blue, in the editor-in-question's contrib history ;) GoodDay ( talk) 14:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:BMJ/Reviewer tutorial
I'm hoping to walk them through the tutorial en masse in a conference call, so I can answer their questions as we go. But I've set it up for now so they can each do it on their own. Bedtime here. Any thoughts would be much appreciated. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 15:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
It's bedtime ime here. Would you mind fielding any questions that arise over the next few hours?
When I wake up, I'll add a section, with a little formatting, for any reviewer who has completed the tutorial, so they can post their review. If they're keen to start, would you please just add a subsection to the article talk page using their name as the heading?. Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 16:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea why nothing's happened yet. I'll leave it a bit longer and ask BMJ if they've heard anything sometime next week. Hopefully they're all just relaxing into wiki time. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 01:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
1) Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to genetically modified organisms, agricultural biotechnology, and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed.
2) Editors are prohibited from making more than one revert per page per day on any page relating to genetically modified organisms, agricultural biotechnology, and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed and subject to the usual exemptions.
3) Jytdog and DrChrissy are placed indefinitely under a two-way interaction ban.
7) DrChrissy is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified plants and agricultural chemicals, broadly interpreted; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
8) Jytdog is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly interpreted; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
9) Jytdog is admonished for their poor civility in relation to the locus of this case.
11) SageRad is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
12) Wuerzele is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Octopamine (neurotransmitter), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.bing.com/knows/Octopamine.
It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot ( talk) 15:20, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
While I don't have an objection to splitting octopamine into two articles, one problem this creates is that there are now many incoming links to the page that now need to be disambiguated. If fact, there are well over one thousand of them that need to be fixed. Is there a plan for dealing with them? -- Ed ( Edgar181) 16:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15b}} to your friends' talk pages.
Thanks for all you have done this year :-) Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
I've taken on the task! I do not take an adversarial role in my reviews so comment as you feel led. Realize that you don't need to agree with me on every point; just the major things required. The Very best of regards,
I corrected a typo in your post, hope that's okay. — Steve Summit ( talk) 21:45, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() (
Charles R. Knight, 1922)
|
William, I wish you and those dear to you golden days of love and joy in a Happy New Year 2016! Best regards, Sam Sailor Talk! 05:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC) Pass on! Send this greeting by adding
{{
subst:
User:Sam Sailor/Templates/HappyNewYear}} to user talk pages. |
![]() (Unknown artist,
Norway, 1916)
|
One reviewer, Tony Lang, has done a very thorough once-through and made detailed notes and some proposed changes - all using the "review" function in Microsoft Word. Now the others have all gone, "Yeah, that's what we should be using." So I have acquiesced. Once they've agreed on what changes are necessary, I'll concoct a diff of some kind and, along with their relevant notes, paste it onto the talk page, so you and any other interested editors can respond. I guess. Unless something else changes.
Most of what Tony has picked up on are relatively recent changes in practice. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 16:08, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted some of these. please see discussion at WP:WikiProject_Medicine#Blausen_images. Jytdog ( talk) 05:30, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I was trying to clean-up the page. I know the guy has made a lot of trouble (and has told outright falsehoods) on the page, including adding false-information. But that's now what I've done. Can you please be more specific in your criticisms, rather than reverting the whole thing? Thanks in advance. Sure Footed1 ( talk) 15:29, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Have a couple of resources for your review. /info/en/?search=Neuro_biomechanics I am new to this so any help is appreciated. Please excuse any social faux pas and let me know how to improve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrJAOS ( talk • contribs) 16:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
The article
Article you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Norepinephrine for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it.
The Very Best of Regards,
Good work, Looie! I feel guilty that I've been neglecting neuro stuff what with the other kinds of stuff I've become involved with, but, so it goes. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 22:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 26 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Emerods, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that some scholars speculate that the "plague of emerods" described in 1 Samuel of the King James Bible was actually an outbreak of bubonic plague? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Emerods. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Cure Award |
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further. |
Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Dopamine you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Seppi333 --
Seppi333 (
talk)
16:40, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Dopamine (estimated annual readership: 1,300,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 21:49, 15 March 2016 (UTC) |
The article
Dopamine you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Dopamine for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Seppi333 --
Seppi333 (
talk)
22:02, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi William,
I'm editor-in-chief of
Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, and we're about to consider a snapshot of the Cerebellum article for publication in this journal:
Wikiversity Journal of Medicine/Cerebellum. This would make it easier for external sources to use and cite this work, and after we've advanced the journal these publications will be searchable in
PubMed as well. First, however, all works need to undergo peer review. As you have perhaps been the most active contributor to this article, I am now asking you to look into the peer review comments of this article, and help amending the mentioned issues before publication in the journal:
/Cerebellum#Peer review. You may also check at
its history if another author has already done the corrections.
Best regards,
Mikael Häggström (
talk)
12:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
the edifying me award |
Thank you so much for your work on the page glutamate (neurotransmitter)! it's like, glutamate is so important in neuro, of course it deserves its own page :) morsontologica ( talk) 01:29, 25 August 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, Looie496. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi William,
It seems you have been the most active contributor the Hippocampus article as well [2], and therefore, would you like to join the process of having this one as well published in the journal (which have since been renamed to WikiJournal of Medicine)? As with The Cerebellum article, it would be great if we could make it easier for external sources to cite it, and eventually bring it to PubMed.
We would now want all main authors of Wikipedia works to agree with an Agreement for having the article published in the journal (so that any conflicts of interests can be declared). After I've invited the other main authors of the article, it can then undergo peer review, and I'd appreciate if you could then help out in amending any issues raised therein.
Mikael Häggström ( talk) 20:22, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Norepinephrine (medication) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norepinephrine (medication) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Leyo 07:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm just wondering why it makes sense to have two separate articles for octopamine, Octopamine (drug) and Octopamine (neurotransmitter)? Wouldn't it make more sense to have one article about the chemical octopamine with information about it's various uses and applications both natural and derived?
Thanks a bunch Jazzlw ( talk) 15:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
FYI, on your user page the link to your web site doesn't work, at least for me. Lou Sander ( talk) 14:54, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Most of the editors see this article as mainly about the usage, associations, and history of "white" in the humanities, rather than stating or explaining what white literally is as a color, which is well-understood in color science. Could you weigh in on the current dispute on the talk page of "White" article, which mainly is between just two editors? DavRosen ( talk) 15:55, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Looie496. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
A Poorly Photoshopped Google-Foo Barnstar | |
One poorly photoshopped Google-foo barnstar, for figuring out the strange use of semi-colons on the source for Pointing. GMG talk 13:24, 24 January 2018 (UTC) |
I just started that page. Since this is really in your wheelhouse, it would be great if you would look it over and fix anything that needs it. Thanks! -- Tryptofish ( talk) 23:50, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Looie496, thanks for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bradka! As I mentioned at Talk:Kevin_Warwick#Sockpuppetry_–_maybe_stubify?, I think the problem runs deeper than the three editors blocked today. For example, I randomly chose two editors to Kevin Warwick ( LucretiaTox and TexTucker), and both were editors with low edit counts and rather high percentage of edits to that one article. I will definitely look into this more when I can, but the next week or so is going to be pretty hectic for me. Just wanted to drop you a note in case you wanted to look into this further. Thanks! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Looie496, I have completely rewritten dementia with Lewy bodies, in case you are interested in having a look. Regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I think you should take it to village pump. A few weeks ago, i took the request for creation log there, and now it is live. Maybe we would get this much needed watchlist tool. —usernamekiran (talk) 07:54, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi this is to inform you that Dyslexia which you edited will be submitted for WikiJournal of Medicine...The objective of this message is to invite the contributors to collaboratively submit the article for review through Wiki.J.Med, and if possible, to help in further betterment of the article in accordance to the suggestions of the reviewers. Wikipedia articles are collaboratively authored. So, it is very important to make the authors aware of such a process that the article is currently undergoing [3] thanks-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 17:10, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Talk:Chinese room". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 1 October 2015.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee.
05:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation concerning Talk:Chinese room, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee,
TransporterMan (
TALK)
05:38, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
The vast majority of the material on the talk page for "Chinese Room" [ [1]] is not cited. You wrote on my talk page that discussing the topic is prohibited, yet that is exactly what you did on the page -- discussed the topic. Nn9888 ( talk) 03:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 12, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC) on behalf of L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Looie. I loved your analysis of FAC and importance at the time. I agree fully with It's better to have problematic featured articles about important topics than for all featured articles to be about trivia. I have the general view that the work on Wikipedia can and should be nudged toward the more important tasks. But these thoughts are evidently very controversial in the Wikipedia community. I would very much like to see a corner of Wikipedia where this be discussed in a positive spirit. My hope is also for SW support to provide feedback on importance and value. Such SW could consider for example number of links to articles in other languages, number of downloads the last quarter, subjective importance ranking. A a complement to editcount, a user could be able to se how much value they have added today, the last quarter. Such a figure could also be based on size of contribution, removal, reversing by others etc. Even if not perfect, such summary statistics could be much better than the current editcount. Do you know of any such discussion that you can point me to? -- Ettrig ( talk) 14:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are a party to the Genetically modified organisms arbitration case. The Arbitration Committee has enacted the following temporary injunction, to expire at the closure of the Genetically modified organisms arbitration case:
- Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to to genetically modified organisms and agricultural biotechnology, including glyphosate, broadly interpreted, for as long as this arbitration case remains open. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.
- Editors are prohibited from making more than one revert per page per day within the topic area found in part 1 of this injunction, subject to the usual exemptions.
For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) (via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:59, 6 October 2015 (UTC))
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archean, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greenstone. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Looie, do you still think GABA Tea is a good candidate for deletion? My first quick look is in agreement with you. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 23:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Looie496. A proposed decision has been posted for the Genetically modified organisms arbitration case, which you are listed as a party to. Comments about the proposed decision are welcome at the proposed decision talk page. Thank you. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:05, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Melanesia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sahul. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 14:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Louie, I came across your name at the new pages patrol page. As a result of this conversation (which you don't need to read) I have created a draft of a BLP in my sandbox. The notability is marginal so I'd like a second opinion before I publish it. When you have a moment could you take a look and tell me if you think the new article meets WP:MUSICBIO? The article draft is here. Thanking you in advance. Cheers! -- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:52, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Howdy. I'm guessing that you didn't notice the oldest link was blue, in the editor-in-question's contrib history ;) GoodDay ( talk) 14:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:BMJ/Reviewer tutorial
I'm hoping to walk them through the tutorial en masse in a conference call, so I can answer their questions as we go. But I've set it up for now so they can each do it on their own. Bedtime here. Any thoughts would be much appreciated. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 15:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
It's bedtime ime here. Would you mind fielding any questions that arise over the next few hours?
When I wake up, I'll add a section, with a little formatting, for any reviewer who has completed the tutorial, so they can post their review. If they're keen to start, would you please just add a subsection to the article talk page using their name as the heading?. Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 16:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea why nothing's happened yet. I'll leave it a bit longer and ask BMJ if they've heard anything sometime next week. Hopefully they're all just relaxing into wiki time. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 01:13, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
1) Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to genetically modified organisms, agricultural biotechnology, and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed.
2) Editors are prohibited from making more than one revert per page per day on any page relating to genetically modified organisms, agricultural biotechnology, and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed and subject to the usual exemptions.
3) Jytdog and DrChrissy are placed indefinitely under a two-way interaction ban.
7) DrChrissy is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified plants and agricultural chemicals, broadly interpreted; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
8) Jytdog is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly interpreted; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
9) Jytdog is admonished for their poor civility in relation to the locus of this case.
11) SageRad is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
12) Wuerzele is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Octopamine (neurotransmitter), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.bing.com/knows/Octopamine.
It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot ( talk) 15:20, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
While I don't have an objection to splitting octopamine into two articles, one problem this creates is that there are now many incoming links to the page that now need to be disambiguated. If fact, there are well over one thousand of them that need to be fixed. Is there a plan for dealing with them? -- Ed ( Edgar181) 16:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15b}} to your friends' talk pages.
Thanks for all you have done this year :-) Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
I've taken on the task! I do not take an adversarial role in my reviews so comment as you feel led. Realize that you don't need to agree with me on every point; just the major things required. The Very best of regards,
I corrected a typo in your post, hope that's okay. — Steve Summit ( talk) 21:45, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() (
Charles R. Knight, 1922)
|
William, I wish you and those dear to you golden days of love and joy in a Happy New Year 2016! Best regards, Sam Sailor Talk! 05:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC) Pass on! Send this greeting by adding
{{
subst:
User:Sam Sailor/Templates/HappyNewYear}} to user talk pages. |
![]() (Unknown artist,
Norway, 1916)
|
One reviewer, Tony Lang, has done a very thorough once-through and made detailed notes and some proposed changes - all using the "review" function in Microsoft Word. Now the others have all gone, "Yeah, that's what we should be using." So I have acquiesced. Once they've agreed on what changes are necessary, I'll concoct a diff of some kind and, along with their relevant notes, paste it onto the talk page, so you and any other interested editors can respond. I guess. Unless something else changes.
Most of what Tony has picked up on are relatively recent changes in practice. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 16:08, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted some of these. please see discussion at WP:WikiProject_Medicine#Blausen_images. Jytdog ( talk) 05:30, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I was trying to clean-up the page. I know the guy has made a lot of trouble (and has told outright falsehoods) on the page, including adding false-information. But that's now what I've done. Can you please be more specific in your criticisms, rather than reverting the whole thing? Thanks in advance. Sure Footed1 ( talk) 15:29, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Have a couple of resources for your review. /info/en/?search=Neuro_biomechanics I am new to this so any help is appreciated. Please excuse any social faux pas and let me know how to improve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrJAOS ( talk • contribs) 16:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
The article
Article you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Norepinephrine for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it.
The Very Best of Regards,
Good work, Looie! I feel guilty that I've been neglecting neuro stuff what with the other kinds of stuff I've become involved with, but, so it goes. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 22:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 26 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Emerods, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that some scholars speculate that the "plague of emerods" described in 1 Samuel of the King James Bible was actually an outbreak of bubonic plague? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Emerods. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Cure Award |
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further. |
Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Dopamine you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Seppi333 --
Seppi333 (
talk)
16:40, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Dopamine (estimated annual readership: 1,300,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 21:49, 15 March 2016 (UTC) |
The article
Dopamine you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Dopamine for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Seppi333 --
Seppi333 (
talk)
22:02, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi William,
I'm editor-in-chief of
Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, and we're about to consider a snapshot of the Cerebellum article for publication in this journal:
Wikiversity Journal of Medicine/Cerebellum. This would make it easier for external sources to use and cite this work, and after we've advanced the journal these publications will be searchable in
PubMed as well. First, however, all works need to undergo peer review. As you have perhaps been the most active contributor to this article, I am now asking you to look into the peer review comments of this article, and help amending the mentioned issues before publication in the journal:
/Cerebellum#Peer review. You may also check at
its history if another author has already done the corrections.
Best regards,
Mikael Häggström (
talk)
12:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
the edifying me award |
Thank you so much for your work on the page glutamate (neurotransmitter)! it's like, glutamate is so important in neuro, of course it deserves its own page :) morsontologica ( talk) 01:29, 25 August 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, Looie496. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi William,
It seems you have been the most active contributor the Hippocampus article as well [2], and therefore, would you like to join the process of having this one as well published in the journal (which have since been renamed to WikiJournal of Medicine)? As with The Cerebellum article, it would be great if we could make it easier for external sources to cite it, and eventually bring it to PubMed.
We would now want all main authors of Wikipedia works to agree with an Agreement for having the article published in the journal (so that any conflicts of interests can be declared). After I've invited the other main authors of the article, it can then undergo peer review, and I'd appreciate if you could then help out in amending any issues raised therein.
Mikael Häggström ( talk) 20:22, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Norepinephrine (medication) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norepinephrine (medication) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Leyo 07:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm just wondering why it makes sense to have two separate articles for octopamine, Octopamine (drug) and Octopamine (neurotransmitter)? Wouldn't it make more sense to have one article about the chemical octopamine with information about it's various uses and applications both natural and derived?
Thanks a bunch Jazzlw ( talk) 15:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
FYI, on your user page the link to your web site doesn't work, at least for me. Lou Sander ( talk) 14:54, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Most of the editors see this article as mainly about the usage, associations, and history of "white" in the humanities, rather than stating or explaining what white literally is as a color, which is well-understood in color science. Could you weigh in on the current dispute on the talk page of "White" article, which mainly is between just two editors? DavRosen ( talk) 15:55, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Looie496. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
A Poorly Photoshopped Google-Foo Barnstar | |
One poorly photoshopped Google-foo barnstar, for figuring out the strange use of semi-colons on the source for Pointing. GMG talk 13:24, 24 January 2018 (UTC) |
I just started that page. Since this is really in your wheelhouse, it would be great if you would look it over and fix anything that needs it. Thanks! -- Tryptofish ( talk) 23:50, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Looie496, thanks for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bradka! As I mentioned at Talk:Kevin_Warwick#Sockpuppetry_–_maybe_stubify?, I think the problem runs deeper than the three editors blocked today. For example, I randomly chose two editors to Kevin Warwick ( LucretiaTox and TexTucker), and both were editors with low edit counts and rather high percentage of edits to that one article. I will definitely look into this more when I can, but the next week or so is going to be pretty hectic for me. Just wanted to drop you a note in case you wanted to look into this further. Thanks! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Looie496, I have completely rewritten dementia with Lewy bodies, in case you are interested in having a look. Regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:24, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I think you should take it to village pump. A few weeks ago, i took the request for creation log there, and now it is live. Maybe we would get this much needed watchlist tool. —usernamekiran (talk) 07:54, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi this is to inform you that Dyslexia which you edited will be submitted for WikiJournal of Medicine...The objective of this message is to invite the contributors to collaboratively submit the article for review through Wiki.J.Med, and if possible, to help in further betterment of the article in accordance to the suggestions of the reviewers. Wikipedia articles are collaboratively authored. So, it is very important to make the authors aware of such a process that the article is currently undergoing [3] thanks-- Ozzie10aaaa ( talk) 17:10, 3 November 2018 (UTC)