The fundamental principles of Wikipedia may be summarized in five “ pillars”:		Shortcuts WP:5P1 WP:5P WP:PILLARS
	Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
	It combines many features of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a web directory. It is not a dictionary, a newspaper, or a collection of source documents, although some of its fellow Wikimedia projects are.
	Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view	Shortcut WP:5P2
	We strive for articles that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight with respect to their prominence in an impartial tone. We avoid advocacy and we characterize information and issues rather than debate them. In some areas there may be just one well-recognized point of view; in others, we describe multiple points of view, presenting each accurately and in context rather than as “the truth” or “the best view”. All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong.
	Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute	Shortcut WP:5P3
	Since all editors freely license their work to the public, no editor owns an article and any contributions can and will be mercilessly edited and redistributed. Respect copyright laws, and never plagiarize from sources. Borrowing non-free media is sometimes allowed as fair use, but strive to find free alternatives first.
	Editors should treat each other with respect and civility	Shortcut WP:5P4
	Respect your fellow Wikipedians, even when you disagree. Apply Wikipedia etiquette, and don't engage in personal attacks. Seek consensus, avoid edit wars, and never disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Act in good faith, and assume good faith on the part of others. Be open and welcoming to newcomers. Should conflicts arise, discuss them calmly on the appropriate talk pages, follow dispute resolution procedures, and consider that there are 6,818,672 other articles on the English Wikipedia to improve and discuss.
	Wikipedia has no firm rules	Shortcut WP:5P5
	Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions. Be bold but not reckless in updating articles. And do not agonize over making mistakes: every past version of a page is saved, so mistakes can be easily corrected.

Welcome!

Hello, Fotaun, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!   Will Beback  talk  21:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

PS: Thanks for your contribution to Palomar Observatory. There was already a list of other instruments, so I combined them.   Will Beback  talk  21:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks, glad to help. Fotaun ( talk) 21:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC) reply

I made some minor revisions to your edits re:The Great Paris Telescope. It was not a catadioptric system and is the largest refracting telescope (although not a very successful one). Catadioptric is a combination of lenses and mirrors to form the Image-forming optical system. The siderostat used in front of the objective of the The Great Paris Telescope was not used to form the image, it was used to aim the telescope. Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 17:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for explaining that, I hope we can bring this clarity of thought to more articles. Fotaun ( talk) 16:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on LightBuckets requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{ hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 19:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Another user removed it because it was "..not an A7" Fotaun ( talk) 16:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC) reply

creating that Earth's second moon article, as it has allowed me to keep the two hypothetical planet lists (the scientific and the non-scientific) separate. It could use a serious copyedit, but the content seems pretty solid. My only issue is that there really should be a disambig at the top pointing people to Lilith. I can tell you don't like that object much, but it's only fair to let people looking for Lilith know they're at the wrong article. Serendi ^pod ous 09:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks, at the moment related topics are mentioned in the "see also" section of that article. It is an interesting area, but in need of attention. Fotaun ( talk) 16:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Um, why is that asteroid worthy of mention? Just out of curiosity. :-) Serendi ^pod ous 21:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Due to its size, technically, though it was only after looking at Astronomical naming conventions. Fotaun ( talk) 22:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Sorry if I sounded snappy; I'm tired. I really do appreciate your help with this; I wouldn't have been able to carry on without someone to share the load. But I think we need to coordinate our efforts a bit. Right now there is little or no logic to how the list is being entered. I have been working towards a list of criteria that might be workable.

• The Sun and planets

• All known dwarf planets and dwarf planet candidates

• all named moons

• the 100 first asteroids and the largest of the rest

• Objects of particular scientific or historical interest (comets, first centaurs, first KBOs NEAs etc)

What else do you think should be included? Serendi ^pod ous 22:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Ideally, I would add objects based on whatever is the largest, and then the next largest, and so on. However, there is a big problem finding accurate data and images. The question I wonder about is, "what is the largest solar system object that is missing?" Fotaun ( talk) 23:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC) reply

was incomplete. The talk page for Tenth planet still links to Planets beyond Neptune. In truth I'm not sure it really needs its own disambig, particularly if "ninth planet" doesn't have one. And what is "eleventh planet"? Serendi ^pod ous 19:42, 7 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Its a work in progress... Fotaun ( talk) 19:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC) reply

left a lot to clean up. Many of your paragraph moves left a lot of information out of chronological order. I've given it a once-over but there are probably a lot of other inconsistencies I haven't found yet. Also, you made a mistake on your added planet tables: The ancient Greek names for the Sun and Moon were Helios and Selene, not Phoebos and Artemis. You're also going to need to cite the mediaeval spellings of the planets you used in the table. You've done a lot of good work but please be more careful. Serendi ^pod ous 17:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC) reply

That article needs a lot of work... Fotaun ( talk) 18:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Not according to the dozen or so people who passed it for its Featured Article review. If you feel it needs a lot of work, you can't make such a determination by yourself. You should discuss the matter with its principal editors first. Serendi ^pod ous 19:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I think we have a failure to communicate. It is a very good article and it needs a lot of work. Fotaun ( talk) 23:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I thought you might want to look at this. Serendi ^pod ous 23:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Fotaun ( talk) 23:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC) reply

You need to have a look at this page too. As you can see, the number of asteroids with radii of 50km+ does not significantly decrease until well into the 800s. We are never going to achieve a comprehensive list of objects down to 30 km, but we might be able, with the addition of the KBOs, to do so for objects down to 100 km. So we need to decide when to stop adding asteroids. Serendi ^pod ous 10:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Active link for that PSI/IRAS data here. Fotaun ( talk) 21:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply

It is always good to see a new editor making many useful edits. I always wanted to write a "lost object" article and a "extinct comet" article, but I never got around to even stubbing the articles.

Should we add 1995 SN55 to lost asteroid (even though it is technically a centaur)? I think we should since it is a lost fairly large object. I see you have already added it to List of Solar System objects by size. -- Kheider ( talk) 03:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks, glad to help. I added the lost centaur to both pages for the time being. Fotaun ( talk) 03:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC) reply

In the opening line of the lost asteroid article we have "Most of these were rediscovered in 1980s and 1990s, and by 2003 none remained." Shouldn't we remove the "and by 2003 none remained" part? -- Kheider ( talk) 16:04, 16 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Yes, I think that was just referring to a certain group of lost asteroids. Fotaun ( talk) 17:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC) reply

My definition of "irregular" is "having too little mass for its gravity to round it into a spheroid shape." Your definition appears to be more general than that. The issue with the shape is whether or not, under certain circumstances, an object could qualify as a planet or dwarf planet. As such there is a certain mass point (usually defined as around 200 km radius) at which an object begins to round under its own gravity. Certain types of object, particularly warm icy objects, may assume that state more readily than others, so the precise boundary is not known, but below 100 km in radius, gravitational rounding is pretty much impossible. Serendi ^pod ous 19:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I was not paying much attention to this category, but your analysis seems reasonable. Perhaps we could eventually use the shape category for smaller objects for something else, like length, width, & height dimensions. Fotaun ( talk) 20:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I edited your occultation data for 55576 Amycus because I think your reference is only a prediction of a low probability (Rank:0) event. It does not appear to be actual results? -- Kheider ( talk) 12:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC) reply

It was being used as a citation in another article, but I misunderstood its nature. Fotaun ( talk) 17:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your article. I've done some copy edits to make it a little more an English wiki article acc to the Manual of Style. Nice work, more ;-) Thanks. -- Sebastian scha. ( talk) 15:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Yep, no problem. Fotaun ( talk) 17:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC) reply

You did a couple things that are not done at all on Wikipedia and should avoid in future.

First, you put "Pluto" in the subsection titles. Wikipedia style guides do not allow putting the title of the article into subsections, since it is seen as redundant.

Second, you put hatnotes at the bottom of sections. They belong on the top.

More individually, I think you over-section. There is no need to put a section over every single sentence. This is an article, not a list. Also, your placing dates in the subsection titles is confusing; "Discovery (1930)" implies that Pluto was discovered again at some other date. Your "Cultural History" section could be reintroduced, I think, but it needs to make a clear distinction between the science and the cultural issues. Planet X is a scientific issue and belongs up top.

Look, I'm sorry to come across as a jerk, but we're going to have to work together and it would be nice if you would discuss your changes before making them, particularly to featured articles. Serendi ^pod ous 08:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I think you have some good feed back, and I intend to incorporate your suggestions. However, reverting was not appropriate, as most of the changes were small corrections. Fotaun ( talk) 14:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I have only had a quick look due to the number of changes, but I certainly did like including the discovery years in the moon table. I think it is always good to give the reader a quick perspective, ie: 1930, 1978, 2005. On the other hand Pluto was removed as a planet outright, I am not sure we want/need the word classical, when we say, "This definition excluded Pluto as a classical planet" in the lead. I think it only complicates the reading since dwarf planets are not planets. -- Kheider ( talk) 15:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

On examination, the phrase "classical planet" has more implications then I realized. Fotaun ( talk) 15:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I've enjoyed working with you too. You've breathed life into some of my moribund projects, like the lists. But you need to learn Wiki-decorum. The kinds of radical edits you make are great for articles that are still under construction, like List of Solar System objects by size, but featured articles, like Planet and Pluto, have undergone years of editing and weeks of peer review by dozens of experienced editors and are deemed complete; to revise them as extensively as you have without prior discussion is considered extremely impolite, particularly to those people, like myself, who spent no small time and effort getting them to that level. You are perfectly free to disagree with a featured article's content and layout, but, unless your edits are reasonably minor, please confine your disagreements to the article's talk page until you have achieved consensus for alteration. Serendi ^pod ous 20:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I think it is you who should have had a consensus for removing the LPI image, as it was the work of a professional science organization. Fotaun ( talk) 20:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I did not alter the article; you did. However reputable its source, that image was factually inaccurate and so did not belong on the page. Serendi ^pod ous 21:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply

That is your opinion about the image; there is no source I can find that says the LSI image is "factually inaccurate". Fotaun ( talk) 21:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I see you removed the notability tag at this article without comment [3]. You should leave comment when removing such tags as to why you think they don't apply, or better yet, open discussion on it giving your opinion. I have re-instated the tag with comment on the talk page as to what the problems are. Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 20:23, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

It was removed, because it did not meet the requirements you stated in your initial claims. Fotaun ( talk) 20:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC) reply

On March 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Extinct comet, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Dravecky ( talk) 09:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Did you write the hook for this DYK? If so, I really enjoyed it. Nice job. Viriditas ( talk) 13:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure, but that is great! Fotaun ( talk) 16:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC) reply

No worries. I just found out that Hassocks5489 helped write the hook from the article you created. I'm going over to his talk page right now to thank him. Please feel free to join me over there. :) Viriditas ( talk) 01:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Good idea, see you there and thanks for stopping by! Fotaun ( talk) 04:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC) reply

←Thanks for your message, Fotaun, and you're welcome—it was a well-cited and nicely written new article, hence ideal for Did You Know?. Hassocks 5489 (tickets please!) 21:59, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I noticed that you made a lot of edits to a few featured articles ( Pluto and Titan (moon)). I appreciate your desire to improve them, however I noticed a few problems:

1. When you add new references, you do not use citation templates and do not provide full information about the sources such as authors, publisher, dates etc. I want to point your attention that FA criteria (criterion 2c) requires consistent formatting of citations and references in featured articles as described in WP:CIT#How to format citations. So, may I ask you in the future to use citation templates and provide full information about sources that you cite?
2. The are various style guidelines in Wikipedia. One of them is WP:LAYOUT, which in the section 'Section templates and summary style' explains where the hatnotes should be placed (immediately after the section heading). The FA criterion 2 actually says that featured articles should follow style guidelines. So the recent edit war on Titan (moon) article could have been avoided if you had familiarized yourself with W:LAYOUT before you started reverting.
3. One of the FA criteria is actually 3e—the article should be stable and not subject to edit wars in order to remain featured (this also applies to Pluto).

So my conclusion is: featured articles should be edited cautiously with due regard to the FA criteria and WP:MOS. Edit wars should be avoided and controversial edits should be discussed on the talk page. This important because FA articles that do not satisfy the criteria may be lose their status. Regards, Ruslik ( talk) 09:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the advice! Fotaun ( talk) 12:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC) reply

I noted on this articles talk page [4] the these changes [5] have made the article (list) contradict its title. Needs some cleanup. Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 21:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks, I will check it out. Fotaun ( talk) 13:11, 27 April 2009 (UTC) reply

I am not sure why you are continuing to make redundant lists, such as List of largest optical telescopes in the 20th century, or why you keep re-adding a list of small telescopes (Selected large telescopes below 1.9 m) to List of largest optical reflecting telescopes. Again that list is full of redundancies such as including space telescopes (there already is a List of space telescopes). You may want to have a look at List of optical telescopes (which again was a redundant list to List of largest optical reflecting telescopes) and see what already exists (at least what I have found). Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 23:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC) reply

The main reason is to (hopefully) migrate to pages with less need for updating (and somewhat less redundancy). For example, the new 20th century telescopes page will not need updating with new telescopes. Fotaun ( talk) 14:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I would really suggest taking this to a project page. Lists are not for non-encyclopedic dumping or "overflow", parameter "Famous" is WP:NPOV, ant the list is "Optical telescopes", not just reflectors. (see also WP:Source list). Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 12:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC) reply

I have cleaned up or reverted a whole series of edits you made on these relating articles. I think you are confusing Albert Bouwers invention of a meniscus telescope with him inventing the Maksutov telescope. They are two very different optical systems and a Maksutov telescope has a very distinct encyclopedic description. And you may want to avoid turning an article into a series of conflicting statements like you did here. Please use the telk pages. MrFloatingIP ( talk) 02:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC) reply

The information comes from sources, and indeed the real world sources conflict about the issue. Fotaun ( talk) 03:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC) reply

You are misreading the sources. Both Woodruff [6] and King [7] describe the invention of the meniscus corrector. Yes - Bouwers was an early inventor of the meniscus telescope, but the Maksutov telescope is a sub type of the meniscus telescope using an auto-chromatic corrector [8]. MrFloatingIP ( talk) 03:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I appreciate you taking the time to explain this sort of detail, and if you can believe it, I understand your line of thinking on this. However, this is a very technical viewpoint and other sources don't always reflect this. What the article needs, is just what you explained to me, and to explain that some don't believe this. Fotaun ( talk) 03:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi, do you know, that your 'small' template delete the articles in the stub category? I think, it's more important to list them there than to have a new nice colored thingi at the bottom of a page. Greetings. Sebastian scha. ( talk) 19:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Really it is for articles that have outgrown "stub", but they can be kept in the stub category with the new template anyway. Fotaun ( talk) 19:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi! Ok, it includes that category now, or it could be given a new category. Fotaun ( talk) 19:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't know if it is okay (by wiki guidelines) to create this kind of tag. I only noticed this because I try to watch Hamburg related articles and noticed that the stub category was deleted by your first version. Even to remove a 'not stub' article from the category is okay, if it's long enough. Sebastian scha. ( talk) 20:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Well the idea was to have something to migrate the Hamburg articles to when they are large enough, rather then have no tag at all. Perhaps "medium article" would be better so it is not so redundant. Fotaun ( talk) 20:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Hm, ah, I can follow your idea. Maybe somehing in the {{ WP Germany}} template, sorting Hamburg task force or Wiki Project Hamburg articles by class, yes this would be nice. Sebastian scha. ( talk) 09:20, 13 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Hi. I've nominated List of manned mars mission plans in the 20th century, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Bruce1ee ^talk 11:00, 23 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks! The hook looks fine, though the article itself needs some improvement. Fotaun ( talk) 12:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC) reply

I reverted your edit to List of space shuttle missions. I did this because it is pointless to have two lists of the same thing in one article. The list that was already there has lots of detail and in my opinion looks much better.-- Navy blue84 ( talk) 14:00, 23 September 2009 (UTC) reply

On September 25, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of manned Mars mission plans in the 20th century, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page ( here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen ( talk) 04:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Grutness... wha? 23:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC) reply

and a happy New Year to you too- hope we can collaborate again soon. Serendi ^pod ous 18:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Yea, thank you! Fotaun ( talk) 14:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you Fotaun. It is always good to be appreciated. I often enjoy working on some of the lesser known solar system objects simply because I know that a lot of them will not get much coverage, and whatever info I track down about them will probably remain in the article for quite some time. I am glad to see that you still drop by Wikipedia from time to time. :) -- Kheider ( talk) 07:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Yea I hear you, there are a lot of solar system objects and they really need more coverage. Hopefully with Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, there will be a lot more new data on the smaller objects to compare with older IRAS and Spitzer figures. Fotaun ( talk) 14:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Just for the record: do you oppose replacing <references /> with {{ Reflist}} in this article? -- bender235 ( talk) 20:58, 1 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Nope, I don't oppose. Fotaun ( talk) 02:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I would consider Wasp-3c to be a possible planetary candidate, not a planet, until it has been detected and confirmed, either photometrically or spectroscopically. The researchers themselves realise that this is just one interpretation that fits their limited data.

Cheers -- Gmoney484 ( talk • contribs) 07:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your many contributions to Great refractor and other telescope-related articles. Please note my WP:MOS-related cleanup, removing spaces preceding <ref> or <ref name>. Per the convention or policy, the citation should immediately follow the preceding text or punctuation. Hertz1888 ( talk) 17:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for pointing this out and making the corrections. Fotaun ( talk) 17:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC) reply

On 13 September 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Craig telescope, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project ( nominate) 18:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi all, sorry for a bit of a spam message to the editors who deal with these topics but I think I see something that needs changing across the board. If a reader follows the " Optician" link (or category link) in articles about optical designers they are told the subject was "a health care practitioner". That definition of Optician seems to follow reference, although there are some refs that seem to to imply that "Optician" was formally a name given to optical designers and doesn't mean that anymore, it now pretty much refers to the health care practitioner. I think we mean the people who design telescopes and other optical devices are optical engineers, not opticians. It looks to me like we need to change some links, defs, add some hatnotes, delete them out of Category:Opticians, and rewrite that cat def. Looking for input before I start that job. I left a note about this here if we want to generate a comment trail. Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 15:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Good work on trying to find defs and cleaning up the related articles. I did some more cleanup at Optician based on Wikipedia:GOOGLETEST. I keep hitting specific legal defs that are medical and regional, cited some. I noticed the list Scientific equipment optician, it seems to have no valid def and should probably be inter-linked or rolled into the Category:Optical engineers you created, or moved to List of optical engineers, my vote anyway ;). Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 17:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you, I am glad you took note of the issue. Worlds collide here it seems.. what are we to to do? Hopefully it is better off then before. Fotaun ( talk) 18:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC) reply

If you need help finding the formulae for calculating the various attributes, you can find them on my userpage. Serendi ^pod ous 00:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Ok, thanks for filling in the figures. Fotaun ( talk) 14:17, 26 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Do realise Fotaun that someone will have to find outside sources for all of your added information? The previous pattern of our relationship suggests that someone will be me, and I REALLY don't want to do it. This list is meant to be considered for FL; it can't be as long as most of its information is unsourced. Serendi ^pod ous 23:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I agree the page needs a great deal of sources, and I have added what I can. I seriously hope that the task does not fall to you, because I think your time is better spent elsewhere and the quantity of work is immense. At a minimum, we should for wait new, more accurate figures for diameter. Fotaun ( talk) 23:15, 27 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Please do not move cleanup maintenance tags to the bottom of the article. As per consensus, the Manual of Style, and long-standing practice on Wikipedia is to have them at the very top. -- œ ^™ 00:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Incandescence. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Smjg ( talk) 11:16, 25 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Your Facts on File reference is simply incorrect, as recourse to a good star atlas or any of the several online databases will show. I've already corrected Veil Nebula. I propose to revert your edits to Cygnus Loop, as the previous version is more accurate. -- Elphion ( talk) 22:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Yes, feel free to add sources and corrections as you see fit. Fotaun ( talk) 22:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Also, thank you for editing nebula articles. Fotaun ( talk) 23:15, 29 November 2010 (UTC) reply

You're certainly welcome to edit the Pioneer 10 article all you wish but I wanted to let you know I am currently in the process of standardizing all of the unmanned space craft pages. Many of your edits are straying greatly from this standardized form, which is partially adapted from press briefings the NASA delivers. See my user page for more details about the standardization. -- Xession ( talk) 20:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Well, thank you for working on the unmanned space craft pages. Fotaun ( talk) 16:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Space shuttle. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Nat682 ( talk) 05:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply

I was content to leave "Orbiter vehicle: add-ons" and "Orbiter vehicle" as my edit summaries. Fotaun ( talk) 16:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC) reply

I've discovered a strange-looking ref which you had added in this edit. Was that a mistake? Even the names of the authors are distorted. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 01:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks for stopping by; no it is not a mistake but it does have a formatting error. Cross-reference here. Fotaun ( talk) 16:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Obviously I wasn't trying to suggest that the addition of the ref itself was a mistake, but its distorted look. Thanks for the cross-reference. Why don't you add the link and convert the ref to conform to the Wikipedia standard? -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 17:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Ok, I made some improvements. Fotaun ( talk) 20:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC) reply

Despite your attempts to save the article, it was redirected to extended periodic table. I was a bit too late to mention about the continuity of articles, but I think that with Template:Compact extended periodic table, we can do quite a bit of article-hopping (even from hydrogen to unbihexium, if one so wishes). Lanthanum-138 ( talk) 10:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC) reply

Well if you want to restart it, there are some sources out there that discuss its theoretical properties. Fotaun ( talk) 18:20, 14 March 2011 (UTC) reply

The article List of launch vehicle plans has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Indiscriminate list. Much better as a category than a list.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:07, 27 September 2011 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of launch vehicle plans 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/List of launch vehicle plans 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:39, 27 September 2011 (UTC) reply

Category:IRAS, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich ( talk) 00:06, 8 October 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. In Religion in space, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Tweeted ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Germany in 2011 ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Repower

Space station ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sergey Volkov

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Solar power in 2011 ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Kameyama

Space exploration ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Discovery

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC) reply

—From Northamerica1000 ^(talk) 13:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited 2011 in Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Repower ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Category:ROSAT, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. W.  D.  Graham _{(previously GW)} 10:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited List of proposed space observatories, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SPACE ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC) reply

Category:Cosmic background, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich ( talk) 02:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC) reply

There's a troublesome image at Talk:Phobos_monolith, which you seem to have some knowledge of. Could you comment? Thanks, Hyarmendacil ( talk) 03:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Yeah, sure. Thanks for stopping by. Fotaun ( talk) 03:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC) reply

I reverted your edit because the reference you used was invalid; see here. I didn't really look at the specifics other than that the page was broken. Tycho Magnetic Anomaly-1 ( talk) 22:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC) reply

No problem, the reference was left out by mistake. I will return it with that source. Fotaun ( talk) 23:20, 22 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I like your new article, but most of the material will be outdated in a few weeks after the Roskosmos Esa talks about the future of the mission and the reorganization of the Pasteur-payload. Good Luck! -- Stone ( talk) 21:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks, it is a credit to the many contributors of that article. If the present is the future's history, it should reflect that. Fotaun ( talk) 15:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited List of tallest mountains in the Solar System, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mercury ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:13, 6 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited Mars atmospheric entry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Semaphore ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. When you recently edited Enzmann starship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don Dixon ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:21, 26 April 2012 (UTC) reply

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Here is an aknowledgement to your dedication and diligence while developing and successfuly managing the two most edited articles in Wikipedia for 2 days in a row: Mars Science Laboratory and Curiosity rover. Thankyou! BatteryIncluded ( talk) 15:10, 7 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks Battery! It has been a lot a fun! Fotaun ( talk) 18:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Category:Juno Jupiter Mission, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC) reply

I should dislike to challenge your edit to Template:Mars spacecraft, but I don't understand why you removed the italic text, representing mission failures. Is the usage of this italic text a deviation from the manual of style (not rhetorical - I actually don't know)? I just don't see how the removal of these italics was an improvement, sorry. Could you please explain.

On another note, fine job with the rest. Changing the image of Mars, to images of Mars spacecraft was a good idea, as it is obviously more relevant. JamesDouch ( talk) 13:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks! Someone said the italics were hard to read. Determining failure/success can also be difficult. Fotaun ( talk) 17:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Ok. Yes it has crossed my mind that failure/success can be open to interpretation. Defining failure, and then deciding how to organise these failures is getting a bit tedious. I should have found the discussion there earlier. JamesDouch ( talk) 04:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Classical albedo features on Mars ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Schiaparelli

Mars atmospheric entry ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to PDT

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 03:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hey Fotaun.

I believe you make many good additions to the encyclopedia, but you frequently make major edits to articles, changing other editors edits, without comment in either edit summaries or on the article Talk page.

In recent days, you have made a large number of edits to Mars Science Laboratory. Today, I reverted two of your major edits to that article, with the edit comment "Undid two edits by Fotaun (talk); revert uncommented major edit; feel free to discuss it on the Talk page if you would like (per WP:BRD)". Without any response, in an edit summary or on the Talk page, you reverted that edit, restoring your major edit, and continued on making additional large edits with no edit summary comment as to why.

Can you help me understand your edits, as constructive contributions to the encyclopedia, and showing that you understand the Wikipedia is a community effort (thus, engaging with other editors is often necessary, but always appropriate, when making major edits)? Cheers. N2e ( talk) 23:00, 20 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Been fixing errors such as "HazCam" to "Hazcam" and adding refs. Fotaun ( talk) 23:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hmmm. Something is amiss. As I just looked at that edit I reverted, it was of a pretty significant edit by you. And when you reverted it, there was still no comment by you as to what you were doing, or why your reversion should be seen as not a major edit with no comments. N2e ( talk) 04:01, 21 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi Fotaun, I've recreated the article with entirely new text and sources after it was deleted. Wasn't sure if there were any other sources you might know about. Green Cardamom ( talk) 02:22, 28 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Thank you, I will check it out! Fotaun ( talk) 12:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC) reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Curiofront.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator ( talk) 20:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited TRAPPIST, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Makemake ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Outer space, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Callisto ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:06, 5 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating Substellar companion, Fotaun!

Wikipedia editor Modern.Jewelry.Historian just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

nice with illustration

To reply, leave a comment on Modern.Jewelry.Historian's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

The article List of battery powered space probes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fairly useless cross-categorisation. All spacecraft are powered by some extent by batteries, so this might as well be a complete list of spacecraft.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. W.  D.  Graham 23:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Thank you. It is relaxing and stimulating at the same time. CHeers, BatteryIncluded ( talk) 01:35, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Happy new year man!!! Fotaun ( talk) 01:37, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Thank you Fotaun! -- Kheider ( talk) 02:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply

@ Fotaun - Wow! - Thank You *Very Much* For The Mars Star and The Space Barnstar - They're *Very Much* Appreciated - I Wish You A Great 2013, And Success In Editing, As Well - Thanks Again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 03:13, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Good job on the List of Solar System objects by size. :) Serendi ^pod ous 09:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for the barnstars you awarded me today - it's nice to be appreciated, and it meant a lot! :-) SalopianJames ( talk) 16:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply

No problem! Happy new year!! Fotaun ( talk) 16:37, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Cool barnstars BTW. Didn't know they existed!. Happy New Year! Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 03:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks! I selected those from Wikipedia:Barnstars, congratulations! Fotaun ( talk) 18:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of examples of lengths, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pinhead ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:30, 26 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the recent barnstar you presented me with. I appreciate it. I endeavor to simply make some improvement to Wikipedia at the margin; so it is cool when someone notices and takes the time to say so. Cheers. N2e ( talk) 21:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC) reply

Orion's ISS missions were scrapped years ago, there are currently no plans to send Orion to the ISS. In the future please do more research.-- Craigboy ( talk) 05:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC) reply

On Orion's web page at NASA, "Capability to be a backup system for International Space Station cargo and crew delivery" [9] Fotaun ( talk) 05:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bolide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Impactor ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:02, 16 February 2013 (UTC) reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Russianmeteorche.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BobAmnertiopsis ∴ _ChatMe! 17:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:ISS034-E-032377annotated.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 03:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi,

I usually edit on the French Wikipedia. Today, I created a set of templates and used much of your Template:Ngc20, Template:Ngc10, etc., which gave Palette NGC 1500 à 1999, Palette NGC 500 à 999, etc. Thank you very much !

Cantons-de-l'Est ( talk) 02:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC) reply

You might want to have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WISEPC J222623.05+044003.9 and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomical_objects#Action on WISE object notability. I question whether Hekerui is acting in the projects best interest. -- Kheider ( talk) 02:04, 22 March 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating List of examples of lengths, Fotaun!

Wikipedia editor Jayadevp13 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Good work!

To reply, leave a comment on Jayadevp13's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of brown dwarfs discovered by WISE, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa clause ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 19:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC) reply

Template:Cubesats2012 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. W.  D.  Graham 18:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 511 Davida may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• <ref name=aug>http://www.asteroidoccultation.com/2013_08/0805_511_30745.htm Asteroid Occultations</ref> The event is visible over Argentina and Chile, with Davida at magnitude 11.7 and the star at

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 23:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Category:Hibernating spacecraft, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor ( talk) 05:22, 2 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Category:Intel International Science and Engineering Fair, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. postdlf ( talk) 01:54, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Melville Island (Australia) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=81847 Fires around Darwin, Australia August 21, 2013]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:41, 21 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Timor Sea may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=81847 Fires around Darwin, Australia August 21, 2013]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:48, 21 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kosmos 2261 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• v=onepage&q=Kosmos%202261&f=false N. Busch - No End in Sight (2004) - Page 97] (Google Books link)</ref> and reentered destructively on December 31, 2012.<ref name=renentry/> (the early morning of

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 20:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hey Fotaun. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 22:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi there. I couldn't help but notice you've been adding a lot of very large images to a number of pages. For good reason, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images states that "as a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default". Such large images cause a number of problems (please see Wikipedia:Picture tutorial#Thumbnail sizes). If you could reduce the size of those images it would return those pages to their former readability. Thanks. Richard Apple ( talk) 00:52, 24 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:ISS031-E-123071.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Blurred Lines 02:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. Fotaun, thanks for creating List of heaviest spacecraft!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. /

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sulfurboy ( talk) 02:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Landsat 5 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• phttp://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/landsat_bday.html Earth-Observing Landsat 5 Turns 25</ref> It use the extra fuel to lower its orbit so the Shuttle did not have to go as high.<ref name=

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 22:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hey Fotaun, I removed your comment "Sometimes the title "most distant galaxy" is reused for items at lower redshift than previously announced items" from the article z8_GND_5296. Though I can certainly sympathize with your frustration with the 'hyped' nature of university press releases, you seem to be well aware of UDFy-38135539, which does appear to have a larger redshift. I made some temporary more-neutral revisions, but I noted that the author's did not claim that z8_GND_5296 is the 'farthest ever found' in their manuscript, only that it is the galaxy with the greatest detected redshift of the Lyman-α line. From your many efforts, I assume that you're more familiar with this than I am -- I'd appreciate if you could look over the article again when you have a minute. Cheers, Supasheep ( talk) 23:31, 25 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Fotaun. I noticed you added a section on Laser communication to the LADEE article today. Good on ya. Then I observed that the article already had some info on those laser tests in a different part of the article. I think where you put your material is probably the more logical place to put info on those demonstration tests.

So, for now, I just moved the older statements on the laser tests, from the other part of the article to adjacent to your added text. The edits will still need to be cleaned up for redundancy, as now some of the info is repeated. But I did take the first step, and thought I should let you know. Cheers. N2e ( talk) 02:36, 30 October 2013 (UTC) reply

The article Mothers in space has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not a WP:NOTABLE concept

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn ( talk) 17:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mothers in space 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/Mothers in space 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. Boleyn ( talk) 18:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Opportunity (rover) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• about 4 billion years ago, and may provide some science suprises by Christmas.<ref name=rayl>http://www.planetary.org/explore/space-topics/space-missions/mer-updates/2013/10-mer-update-
• Mars Exploration Rovers Update: Opportunity Gets Back to the Past at Winter Site : Sols 3444 - 3473</ref> The team is hunting for "juicy" slopes of 5 to 20 degrees for more power.<ref name=rayl/>

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:50, 9 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Super-Jupiter may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• In comparison, somewhat lighter planets than Jupiter can be larger, so-called "[[puffy planet]]s" (gas giants with a large diameter but low density.<ref name=chang>{{cite news| url=http://www.

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 22:43, 18 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi sir, I want to know what do you mean by keV light in that contribution? -- MarioBros6565 ( talk) 20:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Oh, kilo electron-volts. You can use wavelength to describe light, but also frequency, or energy. This is common for the higher energy light like x-rays and gamma-rays. Fotaun ( talk) 22:06, 26 November 2013 (UTC) reply

This entry at hyperphysics gives an overview: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ems3.html (Hosted by Georgia State University) Fotaun ( talk) 22:46, 26 November 2013 (UTC) reply

I know about electron-volts, but what I am searching to understand is the signification of "light" in keV light. Does it mean that the electron-volts produce light or does it mean that it is electron-volts per light? The sources that you have put does not talk about electron-volts light but only about energy. -- MarioBros6565 ( talk) 23:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure, if I am contacting the right person. The wiki articles of Spirit and Opportinity have been lately heavily restructured by user MoreInput. The new structure is really terrible. I see, that you are one of the contributors of these articles. Please check these articles and if necessary, revert it to their earlier states. Mmichalsk ( talk) 17:38, 28 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, Fotaun congrats on successfully defending the article. Since this article is really your baby, so to speak, would you be interested in renaming it as women in space, per the final comment in the AfD? That would seem more inclusive and make it very difficult to renominate for deletion since there are of course many unambiguous sources on that topic and Wikipedia needs an article on it anyway, and motherhood in space would fall within that topic. -- Green Cardamom ( talk) 18:08, 30 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Fotaun,

you've reverted my edit to Brown dwarf where I removed: "Many brown dwarfs would likely appear magenta to the human eye according to A. J. Burgasser". I know he said it, so technically you are correct to revert, but he actually made a mistake - magenta is the colour brown dwarfs can look if they are seen in a false colour IR image, not what they would appear like to the naked eye. Should wikipedia knowingly repeat things which are wrong, just because they are cited, or should we ignore stuff we know to be wrong? Aarghdvaark ( talk) 04:46, 1 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Earth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page America ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:04, 5 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Category:Women in space, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi ( talk) 00:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Origin of the Moon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

that the likelihood of Theia having an identical isotopic signature as the Earth was very small (<1 percent).<ref name=ps2007>{{Cite journal | last1=Pahlevan | first1=Kaveh | last2=Stevenson | com/moon/2013/05/earth-moon-a-watery-double-planet/ Earth-Moon: A Watery “Double-Planet”</ref><ref>[http://www.sciencemag.org/content/340/6138/1317.abstract A. Saal, et al - Hydrogen name=clery>http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6155/183 Daniel Clery -Impact Theory Gets Whacked</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 22:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Coma (cometary) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. reply

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• coma comes from the Greek "kome", in Greek written as κόμη, and can be translated as "hair".<ref>[http://lifeng.lamost.org/courses/astrotoday/CHAISSON/AT314/HTML/AT31402.HTM Comet appearance and

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 15:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Ushkovsky page, your edit caused a missing references list ( help | help with group references). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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, 10 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Earth ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ceres

Venus ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ceres

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Category:Extraterrestrial landers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. NickSt ( talk) 23:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Earth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Logarithmic ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC) reply

		The Curator Barnstar
		ty for the stars and the trips into telescope history, Happy New Year Fountains of Bryn Mawr ( talk) 16:07, 27 December 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks and happy new year to you also, and happy editing as well. Fotaun ( talk) 14:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC) reply

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Fotaun: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, BatteryIncluded ( talk) 16:27, 1 January 2014 (UTC) reply Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to North Face (Everest) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• false The Other Side of Everest: Climbing the North Face Through the Killer Storm By Matt Dickinson</ref> George Mallory's body was found on the North face.<ref name=book/> A place where one author

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 17:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mars flyby may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• //www.wired.com/wiredscience/2014/01/to-mars-by-flyby-landing-excursion-mode-flem-1966/ W.I.R.E.D.</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:45, 29 January 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rhine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reichenau ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:04, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of light sources, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spark ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:58, 8 February 2014 (UTC) reply

In recent weeks/months you have saturated many planet articles with images that are either too large, highly redundant, or of little educational value to the average reader. Please in the future read and follow the image use policy, try not to indiscriminately saturate articles with so many images, limit large image sizes, and be more discerning in terms of which images are of immediate value to the article and which are not. Thank you very much. Cadiomals ( talk) 07:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mount Sinabung may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [File:Sinabung oli 2013158.jpg|thumb|330px|<center>Sinabung on June 7, 2013<ref>[http://
• [File:Sinabung ali 2014037 (1).jpg|thumb|330px|<center>Sinabung on February 6, 2014<ref>[http://

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Discovery Program may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• net/Summary/7]</ref> Alladin<ref name=finalists/>, Deep Impact<ref name=finalists/>, Osiris,<ref>http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006/oct/HQ_06342_Discovery_AO.html</reF> and Vesper.<ref name=

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 23:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Discovery Program may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *EXOMOON, ''in situ'' investigation on Earth's Moon.<Ref>http://www.ri.cmu.edu/publication_view.html?pub_id=6129</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC) reply

It is great to see you adding references to a number of articles. As well as providing confirmation of facts, good references can also lead the reader to more detailed material on the subject matter. However, adding references in any of these three forms often leads to problems:

• <ref>[http://www.example.com/]</ref>
• <ref>http://www.example.com/</ref>
• <ref>[http://www.example.com/ Some article title]</ref>

These three examples ^{[example 1] [example 2] [example 3]}render as follows

in the references section of an article, e.g. like these seen here and give the reader little or no clue where clicking the link will take them. Additionally, should the link stop working, the lack of detailed information about the resource (e.g. author(s), publisher, publication date, etc) limits the possiblity of finding a replacement URL.

References with additional information are much more useful and it is now possible to add that data by using one of the various {{ cite}} templates. Using these templates is actively encouraged, hence this note. The basic template looks something like this:

• <ref name="">{{cite web | url= | title= | last= | first= | work= | publisher= | date= | deadurl=no | archiveurl= | archivedate= }}</ref>

The official documentation for these templates looks complicated, but in essence all that needs to be done is to make up a name for the reference, then fill in as many of the other parameters as you can, especially the URL and title but also the author, publisher and publication date, where known. The site software will format the reference when it is shown on the page.

It is also useful to archive reference URLs using an archiving service and then add the archived URL and the archive date on the end of the reference using the |archiveurl= and |archivedate= parameters. If at some time in the future the original URL no longer works, the previously saved copy can be viewed instead.

In the cite template, the word "web" can be changed to "news", "journal" or various other options depending on the type of resource being referenced. There are many other parameters detailed in the {{ cite}} documentation and these can be looked at as you become more experienced in their use. This page may be a good example to follow as it has a selection of different types of reference.

If you have any questions about using the various citation templates, post them here, as I will endeavour to come back in a few days to see if you need any help. -- 109.176.163.196 ( talk) 18:51, 1 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Pages containing bare or incomplete references such as those detailed above should be marked with the {{ linkrot}} template at the earliest opportunity. This will flag the page as needing attention. Use a tool such as Reflinks to fill in more detail within each reference. Sometimes this will be a considerable amount of work such as shown here. Many references on that page are still in need of further attention, especially details for the various PDF documents. - 86.144.189.4 ( talk) 17:48, 7 March 2014 (UTC) reply

As you continue to add bare references to articles can I simply assume you haven't seen the original message? The offer to help you gain better understanding of referencing still stands. -- 109.176.220.208 ( talk) 18:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sample Collection for Investigation of Mars may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ''Stardust'' and ''Genesis'' sample return missions.<ref name=scim/> SCIM was studied by the Mars Scout Program,<ref name="USRA-2008"/> and it achieved finalist status in a mission selection

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 20:14, 13 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to OSIRIS-REx may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• marsconcepts2012/pdf/4017.pdf OSIRIS-REx II to Mars - Mars Sample Return from Phobos and Deimos</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 21:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Baden-Württemberg 1 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• q=%22Baden-W%C3%BCrttemberg%201%22%20moon&f=false Lunar Settlements (Page 476)] (Google Books link)</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 23:19, 17 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello. The "Lunar sample return from the South Pole–Aitken basin" mission was a proposal in the late 1990s. Any reason we should include it as a viable [recent] proposal for the next Discovery mission? Thank for your help. Cheers, -- BatteryIncluded ( talk) 12:32, 17 March 2014 (UTC) reply

When I started the list I made it as generic as possible, since we don't actually know who will actually make proposals. Aitken return plans seem relatively common= there is also one for future new frontiers [10] [11] I moved the list to its own section so we can be more flexible, if that is ok. Thanks for stopping by. Fotaun ( talk) 15:08, 17 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia.

I noticed an article you worked on. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

• dates
• years
• commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
• common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

(This even applies for infoboxes.)

Thanks and my best wishes.

Tony (talk) 14:38, 22 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Opportunity (rover) page, your edit caused a cite error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:32, 26 March 2014 (UTC) reply

I have converted all of the references in this article to use a template. However, there are numerous places where the publisher or the publication date still need to be filled in some time.

I have also fixed a couple of dead links by linking to an archive copy. Hope this helps you out a bit. -- 79.67.241.76 ( talk) 12:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Category:Germany in space, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Tim! ( talk) 10:45, 29 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Category:Switzerland in space, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Tim! ( talk) 10:47, 29 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Category:Austria and space, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Tim! ( talk) 10:55, 29 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Plants in space may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * Lettuce and [[Cinnamon basil]]<ref>http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/pgig003.html A Plant Growth Chamber 01.30.08</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:09, 5 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Cinnamon basil may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• basil was taken into space and grown in an experiment in Earth orbit on [[STS-118]]. <ref>http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/pgig003.html A Plant Growth Chamber 01.30.08</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:11, 5 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Saturn's hexagon may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [File:Saturn North Pole 2013-07-22.jpg|thumb|550px|left|<center>''Saturn's north pole''</center><
• </center><ref>[http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/cassini/saturn-moons-holiday-20131223.html#.UriH2NKsiSo NASA}</ref>]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:45, 5 April 2014 (UTC) reply

As a significant contributor to that article, you are invited to participate in a discussion about its title. All input welcome. Thank you, ^walk victor falk ^talk 14:24, 20 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Category:Water and Mars, which you created, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Water on Mars. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Black Falcon ^{( talk)} 00:24, 17 November 2014 (UTC) reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sand Dunes in Har Nuur.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Latebird ( talk) 21:07, 14 December 2014 (UTC) reply

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight#Retirement of project member WD Graham. WD Graham, formerly operating under the editor name of GW Simulations, has retired from Wikipedia. Please pop on over to offer a remembrance, or thanks, or ... (...maybe talk him in to giving it another go.) Thanks. N2e ( talk) 06:10, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the heads up N2e! Fotaun ( talk) 13:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. More than a year ago, you created Enduring Quests and Daring Visions but likely forgot about it. You never added a project tag to the talk page, so the wider community wasn't made aware of it (adding a project tag adds it to several queues, including a category). You also neglected to mention that it was a NASA roadmap. Will you be returning to it? Viriditas ( talk) 08:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Galileo (spacecraft), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Horizon. 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) 09:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Vestacropped.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J C P (a.k.a. John Carlo Pagcaliwagan) 08:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC) reply

I have rather crudely lifted much of your section, refs and all, into the rather sensationally-titled Great Pyramid of Ceres article (which may well be retitled as soon as it is officially named, though Mount Sharp stuck.)

Point being, I want to thank you for the work you did on this section, and I invite you to check the transplanted clone section and article as a whole for any errors, or additions you see fit to add. Humanity at large did not even know of this mountain feature 48 hours ago, and needless to say the huge, steep mountain is an unexpected discovery. My own first guess is that it is some sort of ice volcano. Of course, we will hopefully know more in the coming weeks and months as Dawn gets still closer. Exciting stuff!

Thanks again for your work, Jus da fax 10:31, 19 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for sharing and glad to experience the discovery of Ceres as a community! Thank you also and good luck. Fotaun ( talk) 11:55, 19 June 2015 (UTC) reply

And thanks for your edit to the article! Ceres and the Pluto system discoveries have me agog. Thrilling times for those interested in our solar system. Jus da fax 12:03, 19 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Mount Everest page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:26, 21 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of 20th-century summiters of Mount Everest page, your edit caused a cite error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Seven Summits may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Aconcagua, Everest, Elbrus, Kilimanjaro, McKinley, Kosciuszko, Vinson (the "Bass version")<Ref>http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777282.html infoplease)</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 00:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Seven Summits may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *Caribbean Plate - [[Pico Duarte]] (3,098 m 10,164 ft))

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi there! I appreciate all the work you've been doing lately on various mountaneering articles. I'm not sure if you know this, but if you're using the same reference multiple times, what you can do is give it a defining name that you then reference later. Per Wikipedia's own help page:

A footnote used multiple times may be defined with a name:

<ref name="foo-bar">{{cite web|url=web address|title=page title}}</ref>

To invoke a named footnote:

<ref name="foo-bar" />

When I edit your stuff and tag summaries as "ref cleaning", that's usually all I'm doing. Once again, thank you and keep it up! NekoKatsun ( talk) 16:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mount Everest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Geographic. 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) 18:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC) reply

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	For your efforts in setting up the List of Mount Everest summiters by number of times to the summit Qwrk ( talk) 14:18, 10 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks! I am glad to show off the hard work collected over many years by the many editors here and "out there" which really makes it easier to assemble this list. It really has just been very fun!! Happy editing to you. Fotaun ( talk) 15:11, 10 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello Fotaun,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged List of Mount Everest guides for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. ubiquity ( talk) 14:54, 13 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mount Everest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lincoln Hall. 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) 09:24, 22 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Mount Everest expeditions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Sharp. 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) 10:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC) reply

	The Hard Worker's Barnstar
	Your tireless work on the Mount Everest article is very much appreciated; if anyone deserves this, it's you! NekoKatsun ( talk) 00:08, 1 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks Neko!! Fotaun ( talk) 00:14, 1 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, Fotaun,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Wendy Albano should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendy Albano .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, TheLongTone ( talk) 13:57, 10 August 2015 (UTC) reply

I don't think this works as an AFD under "not news". Maybe you caught it before I finished the state department stuff but even still this already almost 3 years ago. Fotaun ( talk) 14:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC) reply

• User:Fotaun If you will try to do the source citations properly, I'll see if I can find time to take a close look, and perhaps help out. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 03:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC) reply

• Thanks for stopping by Greg and any help is appreciated. Honestly, I usually leave a lot of the citation work to other editors (I have not had a problem with that) but what I am hoping for is more sources so this does not have be a tough-luck case. There was so many articles about this I did not expect the AFD, and would probably not have bothered if I thought so. After a few days there is just one weak delete so I really don't think there is much opinion either way. Thanks again! Fotaun ( talk) 17:16, 14 August 2015 (UTC) reply

I wanted to let you know that I undid your edit on Mount Everest where you added "(ex-McKinley)" after most instances of Denali, and I wanted to clarify my thoughts a little further. Denali's been referred to by both names on most of its pages here for a long time, so I don't think calling it just Denali will cause any confusion at this point. On the off chance anyone is confused, it takes merely a single click on Denali to clear that up. What do you think? OK with you? NekoKatsun ( talk) 01:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, thanks for stopping and appreciate the sugar. The issues aside I am glad we are forming some semblance of civilized community around this article. Anyway, I can't say I totally disagree with all this but I do have mixed feelings about removing every mention of McKinley just one day after the announcement. Its fun to have something new happen, but as an encyclopedia its OK to be historical and make little notes- my 2 cents. Thanks Fotaun ( talk) 12:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC) reply

It is nice, I feel like we have a pretty decent rapport going on here. User:Apuldram added McKinley to the first instance of Denali (summary: "as the name change is so recent, the first mention of Denali should carry the note, to make it unnecessary for readers to use the link to identify the mountain"), which is perfectly fine by me. Sound good? NekoKatsun ( talk) 20:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC) reply

That's fine with me, thanks again and happy editing to you. Fotaun ( talk) 20:38, 4 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mount Everest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cho La. 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) 10:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited TAU (spacecraft), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Frontiers. 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) 10:58, 9 October 2015 (UTC) reply

I think you should stop editing the Interstellar probe article for a while. Give it a break Huritisho 17:14, 10 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Iclicked the wrong button and I wasn't able to write an edit summary for my revert on Cassini-Huygens. I reverted you because the text is terribly written. Also, what the hell is a Geyser moon? Is it the name of a moon of Saturn? Last but not least, please write edit summaries. I've told you that already. If you're trying to sneakily add content, you won't succeed. Ceers, Huritisho 17:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Also, you don't have to add an image in every edit you make. The Rhea flyby and the Hyperion flyby sections are really short and you can't fit an image next to each one of them. Don't flood the articles with images, please Huritisho 18:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Explorers program missions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IUE. 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) 11:47, 22 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Whipple (spacecraft), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Logarithmic. 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) 14:43, 12 November 2015 (UTC) reply

I've just been admiring the pictures on your user page. But Mars a dwarf planet? Now that's controversial! Cheers, Rothorpe ( talk) 23:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks to Jean-Luc Margot, we can clearly state that Mars is major planet. :) -- Kheider ( talk) 23:35, 12 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Eris (dwarf planet) page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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, 13 November 2015 (UTC) reply

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) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello Fotaun,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mauna Kea Hui for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, [[{{{article}}}]].

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Arthistorian1977 ( talk) 14:33, 5 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Mauna Kea Hui has no other article, and is not even mentioned on the article you said is a duplicate. Fotaun ( talk) 14:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Arthistorian1977 ( talk) 14:45, 5 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello Fotaun, I am Qi Wu, a computer science MS student at the University of Minnesota - Twin Cities. Currently, we are working on a project studying the main article and sub article relationship in a purpose of better serving the Wikipedia article structure. It would be appreciated if you could take 4-5 minutes to finish the survey questions. Thanks in advance! We will not collect any of your personally information.

Thank you for your time to participate this survey. Your response is important for us!

https://umn.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_bvm2A1lvzYfJN9H

Here is the link to our Meta:Research page. Feel free to sign up if you want to know the results! https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Main/sub-article_relationship

Wuqi333444 ( talk) 05:30, 6 December 2015 (UTC) reply

An article that you have been involved in editing— Dry lightning —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Pierre cb ( talk) 05:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Pierre cb ( talk) 05:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC) reply

The creation of Mauna Kea Hui, in its original form, appears to be an attack page as defined by policy and appears to have been created in bad faith with several potentially libelous claims that have been removed. You could be blocked if an administrator feels the criteria is met for immediate blocking per policy.-- Mark Miller ( talk) 23:43, 20 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited David Sharp (mountaineer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew Irvine. 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) 09:06, 5 January 2016 (UTC) reply

I have nominated Venus for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Anon 09:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the heads up! Fotaun ( talk) 14:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Category:Minor planets discovered in 2001, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.   ~  Tom.Reding ( talk ⋅ dgaf)  04:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Toshio Yamamoto (mountaineer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Toshio Yamamoto. 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) 14:52, 24 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anatoli Boukreev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scott Fisher. 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) 10:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of 20th-century summiters of Mount Everest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Tucker. 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) 10:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Mount Everest

added a link pointing to Bill Burke

Shriya Shah-Klorfine

added a link pointing to Bottleneck

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:52, 20 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 2014 Mount Everest ice avalanche page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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, 28 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

David Sharp (mountaineer)

added a link pointing to Lincoln Hall

Mount Everest

added a link pointing to Hypoxia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled " Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Dawnseeker2000 20:54, 29 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gheorghe Dijmărescu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Sharp. 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) 09:57, 17 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Kangshung Face

added a link pointing to Lincoln Hall

List of Mount Everest guides

added a link pointing to Porter

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mount Everest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medivac. 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) 11:46, 1 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Category:Asteroids named as an award, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect ( talk) 01:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of surface features of Mars seen by Opportunity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cape York. 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) 11:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Fotaun. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, List of Hubble anniversary images, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Meatsgains ( talk) 16:32, 25 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Carina Nebula page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:21, 26 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Sunshield (JWST). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – James_Webb_Space_Telescope#Sunshield_protection. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at James_Webb_Space_Telescope#Sunshield_protection – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Domdeparis ( talk) 16:21, 6 December 2016 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gas giant (disambiguation) 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/Gas giant (disambiguation) 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. — Gorthian ( talk) 03:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi Gorth, I admire your interest in housekeeping here and I really did not have a problem leaving this page as a redirect. Of course there is only two items. However, I don't think its a good idea to delete it, its just come across as make-work. Also, it serves a useful function in that it stops the dab page from being made after they see that is has already been done. In fact, I would not have made this dab in the first place had I seen a discussion like this. Fotaun ( talk) 03:41, 7 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Sunshield (JWST), a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Domdeparis ( talk) 08:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Sunshield (JWST). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – James_Webb_Space_Telescope#Sunshield_protection. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at James_Webb_Space_Telescope#Sunshield_protection – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Domdeparis ( talk) 08:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Space Shuttle retirement page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:17, 24 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of heaviest spacecraft page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:15, 3 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello- Your unencyclopedic, error-ridden additions to the HI-SEAS article serve only to generate a lot of maintenance work for other editors. I gave good reasons in my edit summaries for reverting your edits. The fact that you don't leave edit summaries is yet another way you make more work for the rest of us. I will take the matter to some other editors. Eric ^talk 00:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC) reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Psyche20150929nasa.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:54, 5 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Skylab page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Triskaidekaphobia page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:20, 15 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from List of Space Shuttle missions into Triskaidekaphobia. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{ copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Ninja Diannaa ( Talk) 18:56, 16 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Well normally I try do this but this was just bad timing. I was planning to re-write that saving some of the sources, but as it turned out I found this NASA article which challenges the Biggs phobia narrative for re-naming and really includes a lot more information. It was information overload really and I have not gotten to re-work this until today. I started over from scratch so it does not use the other page's content which was only changed a little bit. Fotaun ( talk) 14:51, 17 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Its a JWST diagram from NASA Fotaun ( talk) 13:18, 19 January 2017 (UTC) reply

You are an experienced editor, but you either don't know how or don't bother to insert a source correctly in support of your content, thereby creating work for other editors to fill out the complete reference. I don't understand - it's either laziness or ignorance of simple WP formatting that is characteristic of your editing history. Your entry today of this 2006 PDF file four times in the same paragraph ignores formatting guidelines discussed at WP:CITEHOW -- please spend some time with this guide and use it. For repeat references of the same source, follow this. There are citation templates here. Also, there are NASA and other websites that support the discussion of the JWST infrared systems in a more accessible way for general WP users than does a PDF. I've substituted websites for your PDF source. -- Zefr ( talk) 16:31, 3 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks Zefr, I have a hard time with complicated and changing reference code, and my intention with that style is that a bot comes and consolidates those into one, thus not creating much work for anyone. Lately I have been using some automated reference code to add formatted references, but it takes time and does not always work. Thank you Fotaun ( talk) 16:38, 3 February 2017 (UTC) reply

The article List of deceased space travelers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

None of the deaths are related to space travel so has little encyclopedic value, most are listed at List of astronauts by name

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MilborneOne ( talk) 17:13, 3 February 2017 (UTC) reply

The issue not addressed is that list of astronauts includes those that have not flown in space, but also people that received that certification. This brings together the death lists with humans that have actually been in space. Thanks Fotaun ( talk) 17:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of deceased space travelers 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/List of deceased space travelers 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. MilborneOne ( talk) 17:55, 3 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:

• On the Buzz Aldrin page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)
• On the List of space travelers by name page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:25, 4 February 2017 (UTC) reply

What is this edit about? You entered: "NASA previously fixed the hubble, of course no wants a problem but sometimes its smart to have a plan b such as bumpers on cars." 1) the edit is incoherent grammar, 2) Hubble is not capitalized, 3) you write an opinion about what is 'smart', 4) you write a suggestion about 'plan b'. This is reckless, careless editing that is WP:OR, badly written, and unconscious about WP:5P1. Please be more deliberate and write carefully for the encyclopedia. -- Zefr ( talk) 20:16, 8 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Well that sentence was a work in progress. Its a summary of what was there, content you deleted twice now. Your advice would be more credible if your work on references did not cause so much collateral damage Fotaun ( talk) 20:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Your dedication to space topics is admirable, but you conduct too much careless editing, especially references as noted multiple times above. Perhaps you should use your sandbox to start edits before finalizing an entry. You can make good edits, such as this one today. Please slow down, edit carefully, including grammar and syntax, and pay attention to full reference formatting and details. Your failure to do this causes other editors to have to clean up a mess. -- Zefr ( talk) 23:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Category:Dead astronauts, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 18:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Europa Lander (NASA), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ASRG. 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) 10:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Like the upload page said, its from the NASA publication EP-107 Skylab: A Guidebook Fotaun ( talk) 17:52, 12 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi Fotaun, Im a contributor in telescopes articles and I would like your backing, can you back me on this deletion request for the Colossus Telescope page. Thanks. Link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colossus Telescope Quantanew ( talk) 17:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mount Everest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Geographic. 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) 09:51, 15 April 2017 (UTC) reply

Unspecified source/license for File:Hillary Step near Everest Topcropped1.png

Thanks for uploading File:Hillary Step near Everest Topcropped1.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{ PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{ self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ^{( Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 15:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Mount Everest summiters by number of times to the summit up to 2015 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/List of Mount Everest summiters by number of times to the summit up to 2015 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. - KAP03( ^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 19:23, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks for creating Fine Guidance Sensor (HST), Fotaun!

Wikipedia editor Mduvekot just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks!

To reply, leave a comment on Mduvekot's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Mduvekot ( talk) 17:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Thank you for reviewing it! Fotaun ( talk) 12:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC) reply

You're obviously a big Mount Everest fan, and thanks for your work to improve said articles on Wikipedia. Check this image at right, pretty epic. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Thank north! That is a really nice picture; I like how its really ON the mountain and it is neat to the see the people on it. Epic!! Fotaun ( talk) 19:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi Fotaun and let me say thanks for the huge work you've doing to the JWST. I'm working at the it.wiki version. I've a question about the MIRI: here (updated october 2015) the resolution is (1.7 by 1.3 arcmin). But in other place (like here, i use this ref. for my page) the resolution is 74" x 113" (arcsec.). If i know well, an arcsec is 1/60 of arcmin, not 1/100. For that, the two expressions are not equivalent. Can you explain me the question ? sorry for my english and I will renew your compliments for your work. Feel free to write in my it.wiki talk.-- Windino Rec 10:02, 15 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Looks like that was the older specs from the early 2000s. I have found these older specifications, which can change during development, can sometimes work there way into newer material. Nice job on the ita wiki!!! Fotaun ( talk) 12:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks for answer :)-- Windino Rec 13:44, 16 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your tracks. I've done MIRI (for me is still a stub). Now the NIRSpec ;)-- Windino Rec 15:51, 22 September 2017 (UTC) reply

Nice job!!! Fotaun ( talk) 15:32, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Thanks!! Fotaun ( talk) 12:30, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1747 of Precious, a prize of QAI! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks again, and thanks for stopping by. Its been a great year. Fotaun ( talk) 17:48, 14 October 2018 (UTC) reply

Two years now! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC) reply

Revert me without comment again and I'll assume you're being disruptive on purpose. Get consensus before making a controversial change to a redirect that has existed in its current form for 12 years. — Xezbeth ( talk) 17:14, 14 November 2017 (UTC) reply

I was working on comment on the discussion page, sorry. Fotaun ( talk) 17:15, 14 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Hi. I see from your barnstars that you've earned respect - & Space is interesting!

Also I see you appreciate others' time.

And you have been requested to supply some Edit Summaries, as you used to take the time to do, in your earlier days. But you no longer do, sadly, despite guidelines. Why do you shun ESs?

It would help other editors a lot if you supplied ESs - however brief - so that they don't have to examine your edits to see if they're kosher.

PS: Had you seen Help:Archiving a talk page?

Regards, Trafford09 ( talk) 06:58, 2 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello. I see that you've been very active editing articles related to space science. You have a lot of ideas, but it might be helpful if you slowed down a little and checked your work before posting. For instance, you have posted many references in this format: ^[1] These result in an improperly formatted citation. If you are in too much of a a hurry, please just omit the square brackets, so the ref is formatted like this: ^[2] However, the best practice is to use templates to properly format the reference.

Also, if you re-use the same link twice, just add a name to the reference instead of copy-pasting the entire URL.

Finally, remember to adhere to WP:MOS. Cite your work, keep a neutral tone, avoid "original research", such as speculation and editorial comments, and make sure the content is relevant to the article/section. When in doubt, you can always post your idea in the article's Talk page. This lets other people edit them for grammar, relevance, accuracy, etc, before posting. Thanks for your work, and keep the edits coming. Hadron137 ( talk) 22:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello and thanks for advice. Feel free to edit, its a Wikipedia after all and its expected. As for the references I tend to use the auto-format, or I hope to complete it later. Like so much else here its a work in progress. Fotaun ( talk) 00:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syrtis Major ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:19, 15 January 2018 (UTC) reply

	The Mars Rover Star
	To Fotaun - for your Excellent editing efforts with the " Opportunity mission timeline" and related content - Thank you - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 18:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC) reply

WOW!! Thanks DRB!!!! Thank you for the star and happy editing to you. Fotaun ( talk) 18:18, 10 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Unspecified source/license for File:Pia21486curiowheelpopping.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Pia21486curiowheelpopping.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{ PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{ self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ^{( Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 16:45, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Please discuss on talk:Mount_Everest#Too many large pics and explain your recent revert. Vsmith ( talk) 14:54, 31 March 2018 (UTC) reply

There was a user that deleted a large portion of page who was banned as a sock-pocket, I was trying to get the page back to normal. Thanks Fotaun ( talk) 18:21, 1 April 2018 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Teleoperator Retrieval System, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Attitude ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited FIELDS, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boom ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:35, 20 August 2018 (UTC) reply

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For your tireless contributions to spaceflight projects and articles. Thank you! Rowan Forest ( talk) 13:34, 13 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot battery, its a lot of fun and its great working with the editors here. Wish you the best!! Fotaun ( talk) 17:57, 14 September 2018 (UTC) reply

Unspecified source/license for File:PIA19298 hiresba14.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:PIA19298 hiresba14.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{ PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{ self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ^{( Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 17:01, 10 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Template:2016 in space. When you were adding content to the page, you added duplicate arguments to a template which can cause issues with how the template is rendered. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find these errors as they will display in red at the top of the page. Thanks! Zackmann ( ^{Talk to me}/ _{What I been doing}) 18:18, 17 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of near-Earth object observation projects requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Whispering^{( t)} 19:05, 21 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Quite impressed, and thank you, for your very good recent (and long-standing) articles. Your New Horizons collection, which I'm doing some minor tidying up on, covers the entire range of the mission. Thanks again, nice work! Randy Kryn ( talk) 23:01, 21 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks Kryn, and thank you for working on the NH and other templates! Cheers Fotaun ( talk) 17:20, 22 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi! I have drafted another RfC at Talk:Skylab_controversy#New_RfC_proposal. Please comment on how best to get appropriate input from the Wikipedia editor community. -- ke4roh ( talk) 14:44, 29 November 2018 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Galileo Probe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prograde ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Merry Christmas! A Christmas cookie for you. Thanks for all your volunteer work. All the best Cheers, Rowan Forest ( talk) 17:57, 24 December 2018 (UTC) reply

Thanks rowan! Seasons greetings and great editing in 2018. A truly memorable holidays for spaceflight between osiris, new horizons, insight, juno, and parker, exciting times. Wish you the best also and a wonderful 2019. Fotaun ( talk) 18:18, 24 December 2018 (UTC) reply

I was trying to update the verb tense in this article, but found I had insufficient knowledge. Seems like the Curiosity landing is addressed in a future tense. Perhaps you could have a look? Thanks. Oh, and I'm enjoying these articles on Mars very much! -- LilHelpa ( talk) 22:29, 27 September 2019 (UTC) reply

OK I will have a look at it. One issue is that the rover is still in Gale crater. So you could say MSL is at its landing site in Gale crater even in 2019. However, it is no longer at Bradbury landing, so that would be past tense. Thanks. Fotaun ( talk) 17:12, 28 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Astrograph, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chronometer ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:34, 21 October 2019 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yerkes Observatory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yellowwood ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:35, 28 October 2019 (UTC) reply

You have used incorrect list markup at Royal Observatory, Greenwich. See Help:List#List basics. Specifically, a line starting with a semicolon indicates a term/description list. The term, which begins with a semicolon, must be followed with a description, which begins with a colon. Your edits seem to be misusing the semicolon as a heading. Jc3s5h ( talk) 19:47, 8 November 2019 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Nicholas U. Mayall Telescope ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Spectra

Royal Observatory, Greenwich ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Nautical Almanac Office

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC) reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:M1knpo4m1973.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 13:49, 10 November 2019 (UTC) reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nicholas U. Mayall Telescope, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spectra ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver).

( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 07:30, 17 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Re: these (and other) edits at Refracting telescope. Could you please try to follow basic MOS, try not to load sections with off topic and repeating/redundant material, and follow basic MOS:IMAGES such as MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE and MOS:SANDWICHING. This is pretty standard stuff and a little more care in editing would be appreciated, Thank you. Noaccountaccount ( talk) 21:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Hi. Here, you forgot to define ref "Springer". —Biscuit-in-Chief :-) ^{( Talk – Contribs)} 15:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC) reply

Oh it was a straggler from 433 Eros, there is a bot that usually gets those but sometimes it must be done manually. Fotaun ( talk) 20:49, 21 November 2019 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of space launch system designs 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/List of space launch system designs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Soumyabrata ( talk • subpages) 07:07, 25 December 2019 (UTC) reply

You've mistakenly linked to the 2011 AfD; the correct one is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of space launch system designs (2nd nomination). Also, you posted this notice twice, so I deleted the second one. – PointyOintment ❬ 💬• ⌨❭  01:15, 30 December 2019 (UTC) reply

a wishful for a good 2020 -- Windino Rec 20:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Just in case you missed it. I did. See  [12] if you want to update Hubble's commemorative picture page. Regards,  220 of ^Borg 18:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

NASA, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

I am notifying you, because you seem to be a major contributor to that article. Feel free to delete this notice. ― Hebsen ( talk) 00:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Precious

Three years!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC) reply

The article NASA research has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight#NASA research article, there is literally nothing salvageable here. The topic is potentially worthy of its own article, but this article is actively worse than nothing, as it only covers a tiny proportion of NASA's research programs and consequently gives a misleading impression of what they do; it also potentially misleads readers into thinking this apparently machine-translated gibberish is all we have on the topic, rather than the generally high-quality existing articles on individual NASA programs.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  ‑  Iridescent 16:22, 17 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{ NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NASA research 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/NASA research until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.  ‑  Iridescent 17:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi,

Back in December 2010, you made an edit to the Space Shuttle article that added a figure for capacity to polar orbit.

(this was https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Space_Shuttle&oldid=402377328)

Payload to Polar orbit 12,700 kg (28,000 lb)

Do you have a citable source for this? In addition, can you supply details on the altitude and inclination for the polar orbit in question?

Part of the reason I ask is that other sources seem to contradict this figure.

• At https://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/shutref/sts/launch.html, we find:

 "Using OV-103 (Discovery) or OV-104 (Atlantis), the cargo-lift weight capability is 29,600 pounds for a 98-degree launch inclination and 110-nautical-mile (126-statute-mile) polar orbit. Again, an increase in altitude costs approximately 100 pounds per nautical mile. NASA assumes also that the advanced solid rocket motor will replace the filament-wound solid rocket motor case previously used for western test range assessments.

 The same mission at 68 degrees inclination (minimum western test range inclination based on range safety limitations) is 49,600 pounds.

 Performance for intermediate inclinations can be estimated by allowing 660 pounds for each degree of plane change between inclinations of 68 and 98 degrees."

 (666.66 seems more accurate than 660, but I digress)

• https://www.thespacereview.com/article/2599/1 and https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/589823/teal-ruby/ describe a cancelled mission that would have placed a spacecraft (2000lb according to one, nearer 6000lb according to the other) in a roughly 740km (400 nautical mile) altitude polar orbit at 72.5 degree inclination. Using the above figures, the maximum capacity to that orbit would have been 17,600 lb.
• https://www.globalsecurity.org/space/facility/vafb-slc-6.htm mentions an Air Force colonel "admitting that the Air Force built SLC-6 to put 32,000-pound payloads into polar orbit"
• Space Shuttle Reference mission 3B was to recover a 25,000 lb satellite from a 100 nautical mile polar orbit.

I'm going to repost this on the Space Shuttle talk page, so you may want to reply there instead of here.

Thanks,

Astrid.

AstridRedfern ( talk) 19:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Category:Locations near Mount Everest has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect ( talk) 15:22, 21 March 2021 (UTC) reply

Hey, Fotaun. I saw that you moved the article about bottled oxygen (climbing) back in 2016 to its current disambiguated title. I'm curious as to why, seeing as how there currently aren't any other articles about similar subjects. As such, its disambiguation seems unnecessary. I'm considering a request to have its original title restored but first wanted to hear your thoughts about it. Jay D. Easy ( t •  c) 16:33, 31 December 2021 (UTC) reply

jps ( talk) 13:59, 12 September 2022 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Category:Mars topography indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Category:Mars images indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:55, 24 November 2022 (UTC) reply

The article Obsession Telescopes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional, lacking secondary sources to prove or even indicate notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Drmies ( talk) 18:08, 8 November 2023 (UTC) reply

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 23 § Centuries in (outer) space on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Aidan721 ( talk) 14:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply