We have someone looking at this for FAC preparation. Casliber is commenting on the article talk page. Here's a comment about the mineralogy section you may want to look at. PumpkinSky talk 12:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith. Happy New Year. Please view older discussion of September 2011 on your page. I just checked the comments on my request for deletion: no comments whatsoever in 3 months. Furthermore I checked the page Mark Schneider (designer) and it was not only edited by one person, it was recently edited by a specific user named SchneiderDesign. So I think there can be little ambiguity the whole page has been set up from the start as a self promotional page. How to deal with this? I furthermore see that cathy waterman has ALSO recently been edited (more or less same dates) by an anonymous user who only edited this page and nothing else. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/74.109.30.77. So it seems to me there's sufficient ammo to argue that the three pages I mentioned a few months ago have in fact been self-promotional pages? Gem-fanat ( talk) 00:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
How occassionally you may think a word means one thing, but it really means another?
I've been calling provinces providences for years now...jeez. Thanks for fixing my errors, haha. What Wikipedia will teach you. Res Mar 03:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
See User:PumpkinSky/Sandbox. Links are about the [{Evanston Formation]], well not new, but only a couple lines in it. Seems to be lots of info on this. But I cannot find a free image of anything I know for sure is one of its outcroppings. Are you in terested in working together on this? PumpkinSky talk 01:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
FYI, I warned the IP who made the edit that you reverted recently at Speed of Light with subst:uw-disruptive1. I tried to find a better warning template but there doesn't seem to be a template specifically for warning someone for inserting inappropriate content in references. If you can think of a better template to use then please let me know. Thanks! Pine talk 08:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
On 7 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wilson Butte Cave, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that discoveries in Wilson Butte Cave in Idaho, which formed as a lava tube, include both camel bones and the oldest evidence of human presence on the Snake River Plain? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wilson Butte Cave.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. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Neenach Volcano, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coastal Range ( 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) 11:27, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Your attention is requested here: Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Reshoot_of_Yogo_sapphires. PumpkinSky talk 23:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Please have a look at the edit history on this page for Ana_de_Mendonça. This is becoming an ongoing unproductive edit war. Everything I enter is taken from sources yet mr Davide1941 sees it his job to re vert everything I touch. I am getting ready to walk away from editing here a tall, but who will protect the articles from such uninformed edits? Colon-el-Nuevo ( talk) 00:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello Vsmith, greetings in 2012 ;) Could you move Raton hotspot to Jemez Lineament, please. Or do you think Raton hotspot trail would be a better title? Peter W. Lipman (p. 166) says that there is no systematic progression of age, ruling out a hotspot origin (Continental tectonics: Studies in geophysics: Study of Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems; authors: Assembly of Mathematical and Physical Sciences (U.S.). Geophysics Study Committee, National Research Council (U.S.). Geophysics Study Committee, 1980, pp. 197; Chapter 14: Cenozoic Volcanism in the Western United States: Implications for Continetal Tectonics, Peter W. Lipman [1]). Thx -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 09:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
As a volcano writer i think its important for people to Access info on volcanoes (historically active volcanoes are my Forte)i have written many articles of the past years.
This is just a thankyou, to say thanks for your help in my articles on volcanoes.
Regards, Noble Fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 10:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 13:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Kunlun Volcanic Group
Also, thanks for looking through my pages and contributing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 16:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
[2] Your recent actions have been reported to ANI. Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:09, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Did the 48 hour block include an allowance for the SOPA blackout? Nobody Ent 00:35, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
See Talk:Yogo_sapphire#Latest_pear_and_purple_photos. Hope you think they're better, and just in time for the Great Wiki Blackout of jan 2012! PumpkinSky talk 01:05, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
I actually like [3] this image better than the previous, because of natural colors (without that artificial blueishness). It is said to be sugar, but I guess the caption can be changed. Thoughts? Materialscientist ( talk) 00:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Todorokite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carinthia ( 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) 12:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
in edit mode..."These rhombohedrons are almost always less than 1 mm in thickness and appear like striations. [1] --and this matters because...?" and " en echelon segments. --do we know what an en echelon segment is? Can't find anything on wiki..." Can you answer these? PumpkinSky talk 04:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your welcoming message. As a Vietnam veteran myself (1965), I appreciate your response. I am a little confused though. I made a change to a bibliography entry on the Extinction events page on 1/21. When I viewed the page today, that entry doesn't seem to be there. I don't know if I'm getting senile or if I did something wrong. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstheorist ( talk • contribs) 16:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, After all the many prior warnings at
this IP, especially the last warning given by another admin earlier this month, I am curious why you appear to have just given yet another warning, instead of imposing a rootin' tootin' schoolblock? As a former juvvie rehab
Outward Bound instructor, I can tell you that when the kids hear "last" it must have teeth and it must stick, else you just dig a deeper hole and do the kids themselves a gross disservice. FYI, I am leaving
a link to this question on the talk page of the admin who previously posted a "last" warning on that IP's talk page.
NewsAndEventsGuy (
talk) 17:09, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Edit conflict; I had just tried to post the following....
Nevermind, and I apologize. I belatedly realized that you did impose a rootin' tootin' schoolblock. I was confused by the template text "Due to persistent vandalism anonymous editing from your school, library, or educational institution's IP address might be disabled." (bold supplied) Being unfamiliar with the schoolblock concept, I erroneously read the word "might" to mean yet another warning, and I now realize my error. Thanks for giving this IP a well deserved softblock.
NewsAndEventsGuy (
talk) 17:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, can you expand this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Why did you undo my changes in the Kevin Trenberth article? Do you really believe that the Climategate scandal is an irrelevant detail of his life? Do you really believe that his famous E-mails don't deserve encyclopedic diffusion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.36.31.114 ( talk) 16:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello Vsmith. Just wanted to say thank for the revert of the trolling on my talk page. I should have left this yesterday but a hectic weekend off wiki and on got in the way. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 22:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, we have a little trouble on the Yogo Sapphire article. PumpkinSky has quit over some of his other articles having a concern that he did some too-close paraphrasing from source material and they've now put everything he's written onto a list to be checked for copyright violations. As you are the only other person on the Yogo article with a hardcopy of Voynick, I think, I know it's a lot to ask, but can you check the pages cited in the article to see if we have too close a verbatim phrasing? If so, feel free to tweak, or -- as I DO NOT have a copy of the book-- I would be glad to do the fixes and have you check to be sure I didn't change the nuance. This article is too good to be tossed as a potential copyvio. I can also look to some of those other web sites for backup support of the Voynick sources if needed. I spent way too damn long on those photos to have this article get trashed and all the Voynick material thrown out for lack of backup verification. (sigh) Help!! Montanabw (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I know you are probably very busy but here are a few pages i've created.
Noble Fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 19:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
This edit comment was apparently a reference to your 2008 redirect from Tar sands. The IP's contribs are perhaps just trying to right wp:GREATWRONGS, but it's certainly annoying. LeadSongDog come howl! 06:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
The page has been updated. Could you review the same. Ankaraman ( talk) 17:12, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Would you mind spending some time to review the article? Many thnaks. Ankaraman ( talk) 10:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Why stop me telling the truth? Can you prove its not true or are you being bias? ( 178.63.32.109 ( talk) 05:03, 8 February 2012 (UTC))
Do you even read or look at what edits you revert? Or read the edit summaries? Because it seems like you don't.
You reverted my correction of a redlink with a summary of "
no need for repeat of an image here." Alright then: I remove the image link as there is "no need for repeat". So now you tell me I should
fixed it?? However, you "fixed" it
in the wrong place.
Now, as far as I'm concerned, the redlink was removed so the article now is fine. But please reconsider your approach. Maxim
(talk) 20:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
See Talk:Cahokia and Talk:Native Americans in the United States. Dougweller ( talk) 06:58, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Sometime last year I found a molybdenium mine in Temagami ( Barton Mine) and a rock there that has silvery grey mineralization on it. For some time I have been wondering if this might be molybdenite. From looking at it sideways it looks like it might have a layered structure (kind of hard to tell because it's broken) and it can be used for writing like graphite. I do not know too much about minerals so I am asking you because you are a geologist. Volcano guy 21:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
This is the first time I have tried to edit an article on Wikipedia and could use your help. The info in the Tenmile Range article is incorrect as to peak names and locations. The incorrect information appears in the article in two different places.
I am a twenty five year resident of Dillon, Colorado and look right out on the Tenmile Range which I have hiked, biked, and skied extensively. The range is approximately ten miles long and has over a dozen peaks. The northernmost peak is Ten Mile peak. Next south are the numbered peaks, Peak One - Peak Ten. Quandary Peak is the southernmost peak and highest point at 14,265 feet.
This information may be verified in the following books (and many others): Colorado Atlas & Gazetteer, DeLorme Publishing, 1998, Yarmouth, ME ISBN 0-89933-265-X 19916 00285 Guide to the Colorado Mountains by Robert M. Ormes, pub by the Colo Mountain Club ISBN 1-55566-194-7 781555 661946
Can you help me get this information corrected? Thanks. Eztg9PmW ( talk) 01:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
3 New Pages i've created.
I'm probably getting on your nerves, but you can look through them if you want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 15:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, there is an edit war there - but look at the background. In the shape of User:Bjmullan we have someone who identifies articles containing the words British Isles then fact tags that usage so that he can return at a later date to delete it. Yes, stuff must be verifiable and referenced, but when such a need is used to "game the system" as is were, then the encyclopedia is the worse for it. There are many types of usage I would prefer not to see, but to go around fact tagging them would be just irresponsible. I note you've taken out the disputed sentence; all well and good. It was finally referenced and I'll read up on this to see whether it might be appropriate to reinstate it; it could be, I don't know. CommonPAS ( talk) 16:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Vsmith,
My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC) Young June Sah -- Yjune.sah ( talk) 22:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder about the merge tag. Who knows when I would have realized that myself. ZybthRanger (talk) (contribs) 18:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith Wondered why you had capitalised 'era' to 'Era' at Tertiary. Isn't the standard approach to keep the nouns in lower case ie era, eon, period, epoch etc rather than Era, Eon, Period, Epoch? thanks Geopersona ( talk) 07:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Not only poorly formatted but also plagiarized. Spinning Spark 00:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
The article Religious interpretations of the Big Bang theory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
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.
Viriditas (
talk) 02:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Caithness Flagstone Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lacustrine ( 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) 10:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
Thanks a lot for taking the time to revert KUB's edit on my user page! It seems KUB doesn't like me any more, I'm so very sad about it:)
God, this guy is a real pain! Anyway, thanks again, and see you around! Next time is on me! ConradMayhew ( talk) 20:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Are you Mr. Smith?
I think you were my high school science teacher...
-- MaxAMSC ( talk) 21:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for removing my goof — my wife interrupted me. I agree with removal of trivia, as previously discussed on the talk page there. In light of Little Ice Age and Other observations, my intent was to add a new Significant concurrent events, starting with Lan_Xang#Latter_years where I have already put a link to the Maunder Minimum. In light of what's going on today, I think it important to link significant climatic events to articles on concurrent collapse of kingdoms and empires, and vice versa. In many articles, this has already been done. This is my first feeble attempt. I'll put a paraphrase of this at Maunder's talk and see what others say there. -- Pawyilee ( talk) 15:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Just a thank you for added info to the Tor Zawar page. I actually forgot to add the bit about the quake. I have actually produced my own study (PDF) of the volcano (using whatever i could find online and in books) called "Geology and Aspects of The 2010 Tor Zawar Eruption"
I can't send it to you unless i have your e-mail, but it dosn't matter.
Regards, Noble Fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 15:07, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rocks and minerals#Zinnwaldite is it ok? I personally don't like articles on discredited minerals. -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 09:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Cheers for that, sorry about deleting those references. DaHuzyBru ( talk) 15:44, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith. Wanted to say thanks for rewriting the geology development of Yule Marble. A vast improvement to the article. I originally inserted the USGS section into the article because a rewrite was beyond my knowledge. I also removed the 24 hour clock from the timeline and the line with homo sapien development OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 03:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, Wow! that was fast!!I am mega impressed with the way volunteers peruse and check new contributions so meticulously.In answer to your question concerning my second reference: "Aspects of the history of Copper mining in Namaqualand" by John M Smalberger. That reference was intended to apply to the Stub , Concordia, one of the 2 places in SA where Orbicular Granite occurrs. I intend to expand the stub on this obscure little town listed below the article as one of the few places where this rare type of rock occurrs. Because I am a "Wiki virgin" , you will have to excuse me still getting to grips with how to edit efficiently. Glad to make your aquaintence and thanks for bringing my attention to this error.Look forward to further interaction in the future. Have a good day trying to get Teenagers interessted in anything at all besides gaming! (laughing) Warm regards-- Gregoryclivedunn ( talk) 11:10, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
An article you have made significant contributions to, ( transitional fossil), is up for Talk:Transitional fossil/GA1GA review. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 06:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, I am currently a student at Clemson University and I am taking English 103. Our current assignment is to write a Wikipedia article, and I was wondering if you could take some time to read what I have started and give me some feedback! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrifaction Thanks! Ajdu93 ( talk) 03:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
First of all, thank you for your input! Your help is very much appreciated. I do want to let you know that what I have written so far is only about half of the assignment. I'll be finishing this week, which is why there is currently only one process under the "Processes" section. As for the terminology confusion, based on my research, petrification is comprised of two processes, one of which is permineralization. I checked the source the previous author used for that statement and found that the author did not include everything and the source does indeed say that petrification includes two subprocesses. Again I want to thank you for your time and input! Ajdu93 ( talk) 00:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Just thought you would like to see the new list I made for the Temagami mines. The see also section on all Temagami mine articles was getting long so I removed all of the mines and replaced them with the list. More organized IMO. I still need to do some work on the list and make an article for the 1906 Priest Mine on Cross Lake (an inclined shaft also goes under the lake). Volcano guy 08:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Hystrix asked me on the April 1st to candidate for Admin on Commons. I'd like to hear one or two advices from u. Thx n cheers -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 02:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
100,000 Edits | ||
Congratulations on reaching 100,000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have accomplished. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work! – From:
Northamerica1000
(talk) 20:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
|
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Electromagnetic radiation". Thank you. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 15:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
I am wondering if, as an administrator, you can be of any further help in resolving the issue with User:Syamsu at Free will, besides just helping revert his war edits as you have this morning.
He has been pushing this edit for over three years, and editing almost nothing else, ever; almost every time he surfaces to pick up the war, he repeatedly violates 3RR; he has been warned for 3RR violations at least four times recently on his talk page; temporarily blocked twice for them; created a sock puppet which was also blocked; and now today, after the last block expired, immediately picked up the war again (six reverts so far today, even after another 3RR warning); and now flatly refuses to address concerns on talk, insisting that he has "said enough to build consensus" and that every other editor of that article, who unanimously disagree with his edits, must be banned for not going along with him.
It's becoming a real farce, and I think some kind of administrative intervention or something is required at this point. He's entirely recalcitrant and I don't know that even another temporary block will help, given his non-response to the recent ones.
Any ideas for how to address this problem?
Thanks, -- Pfhorrest ( talk) 18:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your assist. . . Is it the standard to put book references in the external links section? I, at least edited the link title to reflect the full text version of the title instead of the abbreviated version.
Thanks again Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.22.138 ( talk) 02:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
So that's really the convention? Guess I've been doing it wrong for 50 years! Oh, well.... -- Pete Tillman ( talk) 23:12, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Excuse me. Why did you undo absolutely everything I added to the Nicaragua page even though it was all solid? -- Horhey420 ( talk) 10:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah I noticed. I apolagize. Should've figured it had something to do with that ref error. -- Horhey420 ( talk) 11:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 21:06, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks for both the technical expertise you gave on the geology parts of this and the paraphrasing checks. I do appreciate it. PumpkinSky talk 20:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
TFX Associates is a non-commercial independent collaborative of 16 senior scientists and engineers. The external links that you disabled are to informational webpages. The objective of TFX Associates is to inform and engage like minded researchers in an active discussion on topics of mutual interest. Please cease and desist. Wikipedia dispute resolution has been informed. Thank you.
Edward Bigelow PhD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.244.140 ( talk) 00:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
External Links Deleted
Ref. links. Plasma acceleration, Remote sensing, Reconfigurable computing, Sniping — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.244.140 ( talk) 00:50, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I am humbled (and thankful) for the hours of work you've expended to help make the Algoman orogeny article a GA. Bettymnz4 ( talk) 13:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
I've answered all the inline questions. Pls review for further improvement. PumpkinSky talk 22:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Here is a pic of the sample I found at Barton Mine. Volcano guy 19:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Are any further improvements needed to Yogo sapphire? PumpkinSky talk 22:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello.
Hydrophilite (Y: 1813, discredited IMA 2006) isn't IMA/CNMNC approved, discredited as its description is incomplete. It's existence is questioned. It's probably identical with antarcticite (a redirect to
calcium chloride, IMA 1965-015, CaCl2·6H2O) or sinjarite (too a redirect to calcium chloride, IMA 1979-041, CaCl2·2H2O). What do you think? Regards --
Chris.urs-o (
talk) 11:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Done. Antarcticite :) Vsmith ( talk) 15:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for moving the TOC at the bottom of List of geologists - I don't know why I didn't notice that. Mikenorton ( talk) 12:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Christianity and environmentalism#User talk:97.87.29.188.23May 2012 ... 141.218.36.85 ( talk) 02:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
It's a much better link. I swear, between you and MaterialScientist these articles are improving by leaps and bounds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riventree ( talk • contribs) 09:15, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Geology for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. - Mabeenot ( talk) 22:44, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Pls see User:Wehwalt/Sandbox6, it'll be part of the PR. Can you help with the "alluvial" comment? PumpkinSky talk 22:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear VSmith, Please consult with me prior to annulling many hours of my work! I made it clear that Citation was necessary, and will add more refs. as I find them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magazine1212 ( talk • contribs) 00:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know this article is now at WP:FAC. Link at: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yogo sapphire/archive1. Thank you so much for helping get it there. Improvements welcome. PumpkinSky talk 00:35, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Do you have access to this article
Keith A. Mychaluk, 1995, The Yogo Sapphire Deposit, Gems & Gemology all I can see is the abstract.
Also it seems the other MS thesis is the one I've seen referenced.
James P. Dahy, 1988 The Geology and Igneous Rocks of the Yogo Sapphire Deposit and the Surrounding Area, Little Belt Mountains, Judith Basin County, Montana, Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology, Butte, but haven't found an online version. The Gems & Gemology article above references it.
Also see
[5] referring to a guidebook article on the Yogo dist. by Dahy and more stuff. The guidebook article (I think)
Dahy article here (item #4)
In case anyone has access to those.
Vsmith (
talk) 04:16, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
And Keith A. Mychaluk, Geology of the Vortex Sapphire Mine, Utica, Montana, University of Calgary, Dept. of Geology and Geophysics, 1992 ... Vsmith ( talk) 04:37, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Just checking to see if you can help with some of the comments in the peer review. The most problemic is the one about the gossan distorting mineralization potental. Volcano guy 05:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
On the Acid Mine Drainage page, you attribute the bogus change in question to Woohookitty, but they appear to be the anonymous edit following WHK's changes. I am not WHK, so I have no dog in this fight, I just noticed the log entry when I was following up on some of my previous edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riventree ( talk • contribs) 07:19, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello there. Would like to address your concerns about the Zultanite page (also some of this on Talk page Talk:Zultanite).
Appreciate your help in this. -- Jeffmcneill ( talk) 08:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
geology | |
Thank you for polishing this gem with your profound geological knowledge, as part of more the 100.000 valuable edits to the project, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC) |
Hi,
Can you please explain why you have removed the part about Prevalin containing Bentonite? If you need proof that it does contain Bentonite, then that can be found here: http://www.boots.com/wcsstore/cmsassets/Boots/Content/Products/Allergy%20Hayfever%20-%20CAT:%20A00000586/10124276.P/Prevalin%20Allergy.pdf
Would this link be ok? http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/allergy-and-asthma/medicines/prevalin-allergy.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexyjw ( talk • contribs) 08:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
It seems a shame to have a medical section about Bentonite with a glaring omission.
Thanks
John - in no way affiliated with Prevalin, apart from having been squirting it up my nose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexyjw ( talk • contribs) 08:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
You are mentioned on Talk:Christianity and environmentalism. 99.181.140.207 ( talk) 04:16, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
For your outstanding support and dedication in getting Yogo sapphire from a new article to DYK to GA to FA and FOUR. The team effort of the uncountable people involved in getting this unique article to FA is a textbook case of teamwork in article improvement, ie, what Wikipedia should be, not what it all too often is. I can never thank everyone enough. PumpkinSky talk 23:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC) |
Thank you for your recent articles, including Narsarsukite. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC) |
Dear Sir,
I have added just two links to each of two Wiki articles, each link being to a relevant page that gives further information on the topic concerned.
This is in accordance with what I have been given to understand is an acceptable practice that enhances Wikipedia.
Please advise if you consider this to be unacceptable and why.
Philip227 ( talk) 14:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Philip Gegan Philip227 ( talk) 14:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Very glad to have your input on various topics around Diatoms. There is a wholesale lack of ecological/ scientific awareness with one notable editor whose CV suggests he may have trained as an accountant. Your support is much appreciated. Velella Velella Talk 23:27, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
You had deleted the citation to D Mann's 1999 paper on the share of diatoms to primary production in oceans. So I emailed Dr Mann and asked him and his reply is given below. He has also marked this email to Diatom-l list.
David Mann <removed address> 2:48 PM (58 minutes ago)
to diatom-l, me Dear Bhaskar (copied to diatom-l, in case anyone else has been bothered by the same question).
Thanks for your enquiry. You are quite correct: Field et al. do not give the 40-45% figure. However, the passage in Mann 1999 is, as you will have seen:
“Recent estimates of global net primary production suggest an overall total of 105 Pg (105 X 10^15 g) of carbon fixed per year, of which 46% is oceanic and 54% is terrestrial (Field et at. 1998). Of the oceanic component, approximately one-quarter takes place in oligotrophic regions where diatoms account for no more than 25-30% of primary production (Nelson et at. 1995) ; but in highly productive areas, diatoms predominate. Overall, therefore, it might not be unreasonable to estimate that diatoms could account for between 40 and 45% of oceanic production, producing perhaps 20 Pg of carbon per year, making them more productive than all the world's tropical rainforests (Field et al. 1998).”
The statement “it might not be unreasonable to estimate” was not meant to be linked to Field et al.: the final reference to Field et al. refers to the productivity of tropical rainforests, not to the calculation for diatoms. There’s no doubt that I should have been more careful in explaining and referencing the calculations and I clarify this below. However, if I had meant that Field et al. had made the 40-45% estimate, I hope I would have given the Field et al. reference after “oceanic production”, or 20 Pg C per year.
I have noticed that, in several papers on diatoms, the 40-45% figure, or the simple derivative, that diatoms account for c. 40–45/46% = c. 20% of total global primary production, is referenced to Field et al. and Nelson et al., whereas in fact neither of these papers give this figure: it is possible that the people citing these papers have not actually read them, or have not read them carefully and are instead relying on other people, who have also not read them. Field et al. do not separate the diatom contribution. Nelson et al. do separate it (the focus of their paper is the silica cycle), but, as far as I can remember and I have just checked again, Nelson et al. never give an overall percentage contribution of diatoms to total oceanic C production (see their p. 361): the only 40-45% figure they give (on p. 364) is for net export of biogenic silica. However, even though one is not supplied by Nelson et al, a % figure for the proportion of total oceanic C production is easily obtained from their paper, since they estimate 26 Gt C yr-1 for the diatom contribution to the 60 Gt C yr-1 that they assumed for all oceanic primary production, i.e. 26/60= 43.3%.
Field et al. gave new estimates for the total global productivities of land and ocean, and of the different regions/biomes on land and in the sea. These overall totals were thought to be more accurate than the previous estimates (e.g. revising the overall estimate of 60 Gt C yr-1 for oceanic production used by Nelson et al.). Hence it was necessary to recalculate the diatom contribution to global C production, using the new Field et al. totals . There seemed no reason to doubt the calculations of the *relative* contribution of diatoms in different oceanic zones made by Nelson et al., but unfortunately the classification of the oceans used by Field et al (oligotrophic, mesotrophic and eutrophic) did not correspond to the classification by Nelson et al. (oligotrophic vs coastal + nutrient-rich). So, to use Nelson et al.’s data for calculating the diatom contribution to the overall productivities estimated by Field et al., I made some simple rough recalculations (‘guesstimates’) for Mann 1999, resulting in the sentence “Overall, therefore, it might not be unreasonable to estimate that diatoms could account for between 40 and 45% of oceanic production”.
Please see “Global significance” at http://www.tolweb.org/Diatoms/21810 for a further explanation.
I think I sent something similar about this to Diatom-L in the early 2000s…
Best wishes, David Mann
Senior Principal Research Scientist Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh
<removed address> websites http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/algae/ http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/DIADIST/ http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/ADIAC/ http://www.rbge.org.uk/rbge/web/science/research/crypto/index.jsp
From: Bhaskar M V <removed address> Sent: 27 June 2012 08:33 To: David Mann Subject: Diatom algae
Dear Dr Mann
I read your 1999 paper 'Species concept in Diatoms'. This says that 40 to 45 % of the primary production in oceans is by diatoms, and Field et. al. 1998 is cited.
I could not find any reference to Diatoms in the paper cited - Christopher B. Field, et al. Primary Production of the Biosphere: Integrating Terrestrial and Oceanic Components Science 281, 237 (1998);
The wikipedia entry for Diatoms says - "They are especially important in oceans, where they are estimated to contribute up to 45% of the total oceanic primary production.[citation needed]"
Can you please clarify this point.
regards
Bhaskar www.nualgi.com/new — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diatom1 ( talk • contribs) 10:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi VSmith, may I ask you to have a look at the International School of Gemology page history? I need a second opinion on the latest edits by TParis, preferably from someone with a geology background. My well researched and verifiable article, albeit non-flattering for Robert James, the owner of the ISG, has been wiped off the wiki. Rock-o-solid ( talk) 15:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
VSmith,
The edits you mention describe the controversy around Mr. James. Yes, I wrote a blog post back in 08 on the subject. I am a major writer in the field. It was a balanced article that quoted a number of the most highly respected experts in the gemological community on copper diffusion in tourmaline, topaz and garnet. In writing about a controversy, balance is the best one can hope to achieve. There have been a few other edits, some to expand and some to contract the issue. It seems to me that what constitutes "disruptive editing" depends to a large degree on whether you want the controversy discussed or deleted. Mr. James and his partisans desire the latter, a couple of other editors, the former.
I read the "Reliable Source" section in Wikipedia and see no barrier to quoting from blogs, please correct me if I am wrong by directing me to the appropriate section of the article.
I also add quotes and references to articles by GIA Bangkok, as you know, no more recognized expert in the field than GIA. I note that another administrator removed another article reference that is to an article written by Mr. James himself. If you review the bibliography of the GIA Bangkok article you will find my blog referenced along with three articles by James with links that lead nowhere. This is standard op. for Mr. James. Prove him wrong and he tries to remove the evidence. In this case the article was preserved on a website critical of Mr. James. The whole thing is quite convoluted. Perhaps deletion of the page makes the most sense. It is far better than having wikipedia serve as a promotional billboard for ISG.
I decided to change my handle from GemWise to Platitude. Choosing a name is allowed on Wikipedia, why is platitude phoney and gemwise not? Sorry, always forget to sign.
Platitude 19:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
RWW — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gemwise ( talk • contribs) 19:33, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
I indeed know alot about machinery, and some manufactures. But, I edited for viki not standing for any group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loney tulip ( talk • contribs) 05:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Pine Island Glacier. Please see wp:Tea.
Were you wp:MEAT on Religion and environmentalism and Christianity and environmentalism? ;-| 99.181.159.214 ( talk) 02:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I wish I knew what this is about; see the history of Moussaieff Red Diamond, and the version of the article that constitutes the current editor's talkpage. I am frankly bewildered. I've tried starting a section on the article talkpage, which is "unavailable" in no way I can discern. Yngvadottir ( talk) 19:49, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
On Talk:Current sea level rise#Add legislation? 108.73.115.187 ( talk) 06:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
On Evangelical environmentalism you stated not to included a link within at reference title, but this happened when Climate change policy of the United States was wikilinked to explain by Special:Contributions/Arthur Rubin. Did you not intend to have the link outside the title? 108.73.115.187 ( talk) 06:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
You have erased my own personal information from my accounts Talk page?? If that doesn't constitute as "talk" I suggest you admit Wikipedia is the largest content of useless public information.
Please reinsert the information to "my" talk page.
If you Brits and your Jews do not wish to give whats mine that is on you, but remember at the end of this you have no history due to your false claims of sovereign capability.
Quote this:
"I have a Bob (bobby) and I have a Traynor (trainer). So.... I Know you "
No more bullshit, just hand it over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emplorio ( talk • contribs) 19:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Dear Vsmith,
Thank you for alerting me to some improper edits I made to the article on the Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny on Wikipedia. I have now added a number of references and sources for the material. Could you kindly remove the boxed message at the top of the page, which indicates the contrary? Thanks.
Benirschke-Perkins ( talk) 16:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting out the reflist there, this is to show my appreciation. ツ Jenova 20 ( email) 12:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC) |
Hi, I hope you can help - I received a message saying you had deleted the page referring to the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme due to the addition of copyrighted material - the update I performed simply updated the infromation that reflects the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme whom I work for. As the page has now been deleted I can't view it to see what the disputed material was, can you clarify the situation for me? Many thanks! IEAGHG ( talk) 14:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Its been a while, but I have finally got back to looking at the Aerosol article. Nearly seven years ago (! WTF!) I was proposing a merger with particulates. Most of the last 4 years on Wikipedia have been spent ploughing a lonely furrow on Cullompton which was my new home 5 years ago.
I have now decided to concentrate on making this article an overview of all aspects of aerosol science and technology. I'd appreciate your thoughts though on where I am taking the article. Note that most of sections 3 and 4 are at present the remainder of a merger from another stub article and will be rewritten with proper sources in due course. It's a bit lonely there so sny comments would be welcome.-- NHSavage ( talk) 21:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
the molweight 290.28 first mentioned on the page was indeed taken from http://webmineral.com/data/Kernite.shtml, the first ref. on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernite page. However, this molweight corresponds with the formula Na2B4O6(OH)3·3(H2O), in which (OH)3 is wrong, it should be (OH)2. Unfortunately, both (OH)2 and (OH)3 can be found on the webmineral kernite page, which seems strange... Using standard chemical tables I calculated that for Na2B4O6(OH)2·3(H2O) the molweight is 273.22. I noticed that in the past the text box was introduced on 11th June 2009, with a formula containing (OH)3 and a molweight of 290.28 (this molweight indeed corresponds with (OH)3). This was repaired by you on 19th July 2009, and the (OH)3 was changed into (OH)2; however, unfortunately the molweight was not changed then. Wjchardon ( talk) 11:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi V, thanks for your input. FYI, the example you posted was an edit warring example. The basis of my complaint is external link spamming and block evasion. I'd like to suggest that it might help the admins who review the case to see your comment broken out with a sub heading, and have it clearly spelled out that you're raising a different problem behavior from that user. Thanks for your interest. I don't edit as much when I have to wade thru that junk on my watchlist NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 15:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Just stopping by to thank you for your continued interest in trying to reform this IP's behavior. FYI, on Aug 23 the primary IP at the library was soft blocked (if soft is the word) for a year and the soft range block for what I infer is their home was extended to Nov 23. Thanks again for caring. Its sort of ironic since I've often been interested in the news stories they post and share their POV. Sure wish we could get them to interested in meaningful NPOV editing. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 12:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, by the way i was only kidding about the tieng Viet thing, i knew that you weren't Vietnamese and that you tried to write it as best you can, and i wouldn't take offense over something negligible like that, so you didn't need to apologize for that, and i hoped that you would pick up the sarcasm i placed at the end of my edit summary, but unfortunately you missed it. I will provide a review for that link as soon as i can, but i have to go back to my work now... Anyways, I'll look forward to hearing from you soon about the concern i have about this whole edit warring thing. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 19:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
As well, can you please revert the last 2 edits that Zeraful has made on the North Vietnam article, that user has added those items in without any consensus or agreement with me, where i have explicitly rejected the edit in the article's talk page (the edit regarding the Vietcong attempting to invade the South). As well, the name DRV violates the common naming policy, and should be changed back to the name North Vietnam, as very few people who read this article know what DRV means, and its the user's attempt to legitimize the North, which is POV. What this user did is against what the whole concept of consensus-building stands for. Thanks again. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 19:37, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Elizabethnorton ( talk · contribs) reverted your reverts of their commercial links at the above two articles. After checking the contents of the links and confirming they were primarily commercial in nature, I reverted to your version and left a note on their talk page. Given that they've now been warned by two editors, and gave "removed promotional links" as their rationale for material removal at Solder (showing that they're aware of policy), it should be safe to impose sanctions if they edit-war on this further.
I hope I'm wrong about the likelihood of them doing so, but they're showing all of the hallmarks of being a single-purpose account promoting a company's interests. -- Christopher Thomas ( talk) 22:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Dropped off my watchlist until I saw it pop up at WP:COIN. Dougweller ( talk) 07:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks for the semi-protection at Roger A. Pielke, Jr.. Much appreciated. Jonathan A Jones ( talk) 19:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | |
I should have studied more before making changes to this article, thanks for your quick correction and description. Sorryasshere154 ( talk) 12:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for the help with the metric numbers in the longship article!Big ups from kiwi land!1% — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.36.191 ( talk) 00:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
My bad! I meant thickness not width.Captain 1% — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.36.191 ( talk) 23:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Please see: User talk:BrightStarSky#Copyright violations, again
We've both warned the user. In fact, this user has been warned many times and persists. Please advise. Many thanks. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 10:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Care to offer feedback on his interpretation? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 04:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback on the anecdotal medical reports. I see you are or have been in Arizona, so you might want to take a crack at reporting the medical benefits of your weather there...if you can find some studies!
Regards, Charley in San Francisco NRN — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charley sf ( talk • contribs) 13:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I see that you reversed my edit on Economics of Global Warning, to retain the space before the degree symbol. I was in the process of doing that myself, but you beat me to it. So thanks. I still think it looks odd, as I commented in the Talk page for that article. Margin1522 ( talk) 11:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you edited the Alps and I need someone have a look at the Geology section to be certain it's a.) correct and b.) readable in plain English. Do you know about geology or perhaps know someone who does? Also, if you do know, can you have a look at the bottom of the Composition section where there's still a bit that's unsourced. I have a couple of geology books but can't seem to find anything that matches with that section although it doesn't seem incorrect to me. Thanks in advance. Truthkeeper ( talk) 20:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
If those links were confusing, do you think u can ask where Lanayru is? Lanayru seems to be one of the gorges found in the desert and its located somewhere.-- 75.142.67.97 ( talk) 01:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I've been expanding the mineral article, and was wondering if you could take a look at what I've done, what I've screwed up (hopefully not much!), and what I'm missing or have too much of. I've been thinking of adding perhaps a bit on more advanced mineral ID (e.g. optical mineralogy, XRF, electron or ion microprobes, spectroscopy, and so on), and maybe more on mineral environments and associations; however, in a general article like this, perhaps the advanced stuff would go better in to mineralogy, and environments and associations might be veering too much into describing geology as opposed to discussing minerals. Thanks, Maxim (talk) 17:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
Thanks for the additions to the telluric iron article. That looks good. I'm glad you were able to find pictures for it, because it'll save me from having to go to Greenland and take them myself. :-D I'm not a geologist, and knew nothing about the subject when I started the article. I was mainly looking into the history of steel, (one of the subjects I know best), when I stumbled across the info about telluric iron, and really thought it should have its own article. I'm glad to see a real mineralogist helping to expand it. Thanks again. Zaereth ( talk) 19:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
The Geology Barnstar | ||
Thanks for setting me on the right track with the Alps. I couldn't have done it without expert advice. Truthkeeper ( talk) 01:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC) |
Hello, I noticed some of your input on articles even though good material, didn't have sources. I'll remind you of this page: Wikipedia:List of free online resources. This makes it easier too MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sidelight12 ( talk • contribs) 05:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
That's the closet I could find. Sidelight12 ( talk) 06:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
My mistake. I got mixed up with the editors. Sidelight12 ( talk) 18:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
If you have some spare energy, please come and lend a hand. Thanks! — hike395 ( talk) 17:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
user talk:Edit Centric#Hantavirus Risk in Yosemite
This person (blocked sockmaster Thmc1) is still block evading by not logging in, even after he was warned by SysAdmin Kudpung. I would suggest that you block the suspected IPs(173.63176.93, 74.88.160.244) as well as IPs used by his other blocked account (Nyc88) and any other accounts affiliated w/them. Why are sockppuppets of a blocked sockmaster still allowed to edit even after ample warnings? To make matters worse, he even violated his block and continuted editing the day after he was blocked! Please see Thmc1 sockpuppet investigation archive for latest investigation/evidence [8]. MBaxter1 ( talk) 18:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
I think that this Yosemite hantavirus story is worthy of at least brief mention in the article because it is now having international implications. I just don't see a justification in ignoring it completely, thanks. 173.63.176.93 ( talk) 20:56, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi vsmith, You recently removed my edits from a few chemistry related terms in which I added links to the External Link sections. I thought it would be useful to have a more simplified version of these definitions, which is what the external links offered. It wasn't to dictionary.com as mentioned. Just wanted to clarify it wasn't spam, again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themaab ( talk • contribs) 19:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
re: Smoke Creek Desert, Nevada =- thanks for some of the clean up - I'll try to find the cites, they disappeared when I decided it was faster to compose in word than on the page and then copy and paste - some cites took and some didn't - eg: the ECV (E. Clampus Vitus) maps they put together - I'll try to find those - but the picture has me confused - the credit says 'Denver, co' - then the smoke creek - it looks like it might be the smoke creek - though the edge of the basin is FAR more telling as it is a 'charged' basin -- unlike the others - Winnemucca Lake (Lake Winnemucca) and the Black Rock Desert -which are charge-discharge basins. The tracks of vehicles and their detritus give ample warning of the nature of that particular basin. -- could you clarify the origin of the photo- having done a fair amount of work out there, that photo would have had to have been shot from the basin itself - unlikely except in late August/early September if I recall correctly.
Yeah, I was Navy Independent Duty Corpsman (entered at E-5 because I had all but one semester of college to do in a double Micro/Etomoloty major and turned down their OCS offer since I was headed for CO anyway and left USN as a E-8 without TIR but it didn't matter as I was mustered out w/o record to work for Nixon (who 'stopped' bio warfare) through different pay checks each month. I was forced to do 5 (as in FIVE!) back-to-back tours many of which were with the 2/5th and 3/5th Marines then the 2/5th and then a VERY short stint with the 3/4th(?) - but worked all regions from I through IV since I was 'unattached' to The Corps -- and 5 years is a LONG time to spend in cournty. Yes-- what a long strange trips it's been. My last tour was too weird - But the trade off was we'll give you a choice - no combat, no military record (eg no VA), and we'll let you do bio-research (mass distraction use of bacteria, rot cotton) and give you a Masters when you go back to the real world. I guess that's here had to tell what's real after a bit. But I LOVE the desert because you can see things coming a LONG way away. Then I earned multiple MS/A's and ended up with an Ed.D. in Special Ed, and am now retired.
Anyway I went to check on Smoke Creek after the Burners finished another season destroying The Black Rock and some of the most fragile environment in the world, and despoiling the Holy and Sacred sties of the Pyramid Band of the Paiute, and the Western Shoshone and wanted to see if anyone had picked up on the dead-end references that were hanging fire waiting for someone to catch-- which means a few hours tracking down maps for cites. thanks for pushing me - no need to contact me, I'll have it done in the next month or so, depending on how tired I get of dial-up speeds - live rural and deal with both the good and the bad. thanks again my friend. I won't be back here to get an answer, but will try to find those maps, they are not as buried as Freemont's maps were but FAR more easy to find than the rail-road maps themselves! - Pgalioni ( talk) 21:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC) "thank you for your service" LOL! ---
Thanks for doing that, I was hoping to get some sort of response from the editor, but you saved me from tagging it - the end result would have been the same. Mikenorton ( talk) 23:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, FYI I think he's on right now 97.86.80.98 ( talk · contribs) NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 19:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
FYI, I asked James to tell the server that sock has restarted the block clocks. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 12:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
This User:Mrt3366 is reverting the edits, inserting pov templates, and putting <···!> in the article to hide text, of Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir, when asked on the talk page of the article he uses harsh words. My request is kindly take a look on the history, talk page and article and act accordingly so that the encyclopaedic values of the article are not lost. Thank you sir. MehrajMir ' (Talk) 11:57, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I have reverted your unacceptable removal of the see also link to a documentary that is directly related to the lake. Placing the relevant link is not "promotion of a film", your removal of it however reeks of something considerably less than encyclopedically acceptable. -- 87.79.208.194 ( talk) 12:18, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, Bedrock Geology UK North is back I'm afraid. Mikenorton ( talk) 16:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I don't often ask these things (in fact this is a first), but there sometimes come times in which I cannot contain my disdain of a certain class of administrator-- in this case several who are looking out for a buddy who is a music afficionado or musician, who nevertheless feels the lay need to edit articles on the philosophy of medicine. [10]. This is going to inevitably escalate to a civility block (simply because users get blocked when insulting admins). Would you consider showing up as an admin on my "side"? S B H arris 02:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi VSmith, there's an ongoing problem happening on the Authoritarianism article. Currently the user Zeraful and Cresix have been reverting all 3 of my edits on that article, for reasons that are not sufficiently justifiable and are totally senseless. The user Zeraful deleted some content critical of the Vietnamese gov't, like of how Hanoi blocked Facebook, how Vietnam is on the Reporters Without Borders "Enemies of the Internet" blacklist and how the Vietnamese government suppresses protests in the country like in 2011, in a paragraph in the article that are true and had proper and sufficient citations with sources to credible international news website articleslike Forbes and The Economist. Then, an ip user tried to reinstate those deleted items and added additional content. That ip's edits were reverted by Crecix (who used twinkle) with no reason provided. After that, after seeing what's going on in the article, I came in and reinstated the article version of that ip user, after checking the changes in content, and I saw nothing wrong with the change in content by that ip and nothing wrong with the sources they provided. I added an additional source to one of the deleted items as well, from the DART Center website from Columbia University. Then, my edits were reverted by Zeraful and Crecix, claiming that "sources are needed to back [the deleted content] up", and "verification of sources failed", even though the items in dispute do have sufficient and credible sources (you can check the sources for yourself as well). Can you please help in trying to resolve this issue? I would greatly appreciate your efforts in trying to find a resolution to this. As well on a side note, the user Zeraful has a chronic problem of blanking out content, that are factual and recognized by academics, that usually have sources to back them up, that are critical or exposing anything negative of the Vietnamese communist govt, and has done this in numerous articles in the past, like on the North Vietnam article, and imparting pro-communist POV statements in encyclopeadic articles, with no or invalid and unacceptable sources. Zeraful also engages in "wording wars", trying to change words used in articles to make articles sound less critical of the Vietnamese regime, often changing things to the point that sentences are grammatically incorrect. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 06:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
As of now, i'm not going to continue editing this article until mediation begins. I have just remembered 3rr, and i'm not going to let that Zeraful drive me over that. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 06:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Addressing zeraful's claims: removal of factual content, especially sourced ones, out of dislike or not wanting others to see it, IS censorship. Zeraful accuses me of POV, but really the info and content I contribute are true, factual, and usually sourced and supported content, with sources from reputable sources, which can be found in the North Vietnam article, the Authoritarianism article, and many others. The sources that Zeraful presents, like from vietnamnet.vn and tuoitre.vn, are on articles irrelevant to the content that he claims to support (I read the article for myself and know this, Zeraful hopes that no one on English wiki can read Vietnamese by sourcing to irrelevant Vietnamese-language webpages). Zeraful regularly imparts pro-communist commentary, not encyclopedic type material (more for blogs instead) in articles like the North Vietnam article and Battle of Khe Sanh article and many others (esp. look at those articles' talk pages), and very often Zeraful's content is very historically incorrect (look at the North Vietnam article talk page for yourself). Zeraful also engaged in personal attacks, telling me to "go get a life" in his edit summary on the Authoritarianism article, for example, and is very dishonest, like saying that I deleted sources from the BBC or Alexa, even though I clearly didn't and is still there in my reinstations, and like saying that he didn't delete content in the North Vetnam article when he clearly did. Zeraful also doesn't engage in developing compromised edits and solutions, like in the Authoritarianism and North Vietnam article, where he kept reverting my edits, and i'm the only one who delivered a compromised edit, in both articles. I also know that Zeraful is following and tracking my edits, which is very concerning. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 07:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
This user often add section without sources, and label other users as "communist censorship", like in http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=North_Vietnam&action=history. He is also changing word and content of the article to fit his own point of view, and when I present sources, he claim that they're "partisan" and deleted it, even if one of them come from BBC, and one from Alexa.-- Zeraful ( talk) 07:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you recently deleted the gallery at Chrysocolla. I thought it served a useful purpose, as Commons currently has 374 (!) photos of chrysocolla, to pick out a small subset to help our users visualize some of the varieties -- and the beauty -- of this mineral. Could you take another look at the gallery? Thanks, Pete Tillman ( talk) 03:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
I have noticed that you deleted the page "Bedrock Geology UK - Archaean and Palaeoproterozoic" by Rhondeag on the ground of Implausible typos (R3). I am a colleague of Rhondeag and we were wondering how this page warranted deletion under R3. Please could you provide us wih your reasons for deleting the page under R3. This would be much appreciated.
Pmc08 ( talk) 08:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Parenthetical referencing. Hyacinth ( talk) 23:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello. I don't think the ghost towns link is spam. The guy is not selling anything and nothing on his site links to any seller. Other than a page that says who he is, the site is not a personal web page. With these factors in mind, the site is not WP:ELNO. Your thoughts? (I'll look for them here.) -- S. Rich ( talk) 03:00, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Can you please take a look at this IP? They've been edit warring and vandalizing. Thanks. INever Cry 01:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for pulling you into this mess I seem to have made. INever Cry 01:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Dear Dr. Vsmith!
I am geologist with backgraund from 1973 (I worked as a little specialist when was a student of MSU in some "wild" territories ).
https://plus.google.com/113608956654143996274/about
If You can know anything about SALARS - You can look site of USGS.
If You have any gadgat in Your pocket - You have some piece Lithium. This metal is the base of modern batteries, accumulaters and etc. SALARS - the first source of Lithium. And KCl - one of the main fertilizers, and many potashes, and very many useful things.
So, I think, that WIKI readers have any rights to know, what is the base of the phones, electricity cars ann many other interesting things.
Regards,
aleksey g.repin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksey g.repin ( talk • contribs) 08:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
All right, I added scientific sources for opal and Neolithic usage. I will try to add sources to the uniqueness of Polish striped flint, if it indeed is so unique. I based on the internet sources claiming it is unique for Poland, however now I see, some forms of striped flint can be found in many places around the world. Please, give me a week. Olaf ( talk) 10:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Can you please block this IP, another one of blocked user Zrdragon's many sockpuppets? Thanks, TheTimesAreAChanging ( talk) 23:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi VSmith, i have a question regarding Pacific vs. Atlantic Ocean seafood. I know this is random and user pages are for article-related thingys, but it's a burning curiosity in me. Throughout my life, I ate seafood caught from the Pacific Ocean and from it's connecting water bodies, like sardines, mackerel, shrimp and other shellfish, salmon etc from Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan etc., and the seafood i ate from these areas had a typical (smelly) seafood smell/odor, although it wasn't very pungent. However, when I compared the same seafood i ate originating from the Pacific with the same ones originally caught from the Atlantic, e.g. from eastern North America, north Europe, the Atlantic seafood had a much more strong, very pronounced, seafood odor/smell. For example, frozen and canned sardines from Thailand and Vietnam had a much less pungent seafood odor than the same canned and frozen sardines from New Brunswick, Canada and Portugal. Why is this the case?? Nguyen1310 ( talk) 01:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I have the exact reference to VI Arnold, and the illustration, however (as it appeared) on another computer, so it might day a day or two to transfer the files. Sinc. Leon00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.24.130 ( talk) 12:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Hey there, V Smith.
I found and added your recommended citations. Reference #4 was intended for the whole section but have clarified. My intention was not to confuse. Also thank you - if you are the user that added the nifty mouse-overs to the citations. That was next on the list. Will hopefully have time to add more points of interest soon.
Cheers Victoriasays ( talk) 23:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Dude, it was an accident. I was in the process of figuring out to restore it.
Victoriasays (
talk) 02:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello - the IP at the following: User talk:68.188.38.198 is at a school (and I am a teacher here.) Is there a way you can permanently or at least semi-permanently block it? This way the students here won't be able to edit without a login. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.38.198 ( talk) 14:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, there's a subsection that somebody has added to the mélange geology article covering a band. It's entirely out-of-place, could you please revert the article? Thanks, Colin J. (NZ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.23.26 ( talk) 06:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you deleted a list of students that was placed on the page years ago. May I ask why? thanks, BigDogRufus — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigDogRufus ( talk • contribs) 19:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, what happened now at these articles: Mount Hermon, List of mountains, List of caves, Gush Hispin, National parks and nature reserves of Israel, Mishor Adumim, Tourism in Israel, and all the East Jerusalem settlements attacked by this IP on 31 October here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/80.179.118.129
is a coordinated sock attack, this has happened before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive733#Coordinated_attacks_by_socks
Its basically many different IPs and "new" accounts going back to different places showing up at the exact same time and starting to pov push and edit war.
This IP: [11] for example is a confirmed proxy server: http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/67.142.164.21
I kindly ask that you please revert all these edits and lock the articles. -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 02:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for straightening me out on a sales link at Old Faithful Inn. I wasn't trying to be crassly commercial but I think it's useful for readers to have some pathway to finding the source. With printed books, that's not hard. But with ebooks, what to do? The link I added is for a book available only on the iTunes store; nowhere else. For some reason, a google search for the isbn doesn't find it, which might be an issue to take up with the iTunes store.
For that matter, Wiki's isbn search page book sources lacks a link for the iTunes store among the other booksellers. Would that be the right place on Wiki to create a pathway?
I value guidance. Meanwhile, I'll go back to the sandbox for more practice.
tks — Preceding unsigned comment added by BluffTaylor ( talk • contribs) 04:10, 2 November 2012
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is " Global warming controversy". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!
EarwigBot operator / talk 00:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC) Hello, I'm Cole132132. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! The reason for this being the refernces were directly stated for co2 gaps as well as tempertature changes a compleatly relavent subject. I suggest instead of blatently delting other peoples work because of your own political opinions (which is the only thing assumable) that you overlook things properly, as well as participate in the Dispute Noticeboad.-- Cole132132 ( talk) 01:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC) Hello, Vsmith. You have new messages at
Plurofuturo's talk page.
Message added 09:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. I think I've cleared things up - they explained the apparent COI (and it looks like it's not one), and they're now in compliance with WP:NOSHARE. Thanks for calling them on that. — Francophonie&Androphilie ( Je vous invite à me parler) 09:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
I added the "MRS GREN" section to the Life article because a new user had created a new article of that title with no sources at all, and with the simple definition. Rather than leave such a poor article in place, I created a section at the Life article for this new article to redirect to. Based on the number of hits the phrase receives on Google, it seems a likely search term, especially for younger Wikipedia readers. The sources I gave are reliable in that they show that the term is a commonly used acronym used in elementary pedagogy, which was the point of the references. I would hardly go to those sources to learn meaningful science, but sources that might otherwise be considered unreliable can be considered reliable in the right context. Would you prefer the information sourced from the BBC? Or from an Australian climate change website? Or from TES, a British teachers' network? WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 14:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one. JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swallingwikimedia.org) with...
The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist. Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC) I noticed you recently made an edit to the Jurassic article. Those paleo maps existed for such a long time in all those articles and now all of a sudden they were removed? What happened? Did they suddenly become non-fair use? Those images fit so great in all the period articles, it would be a shame if they were all taken out :( I'm wondering if you know what happened to them. Cadiomals ( talk) 04:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Protection barely expired on Michael Crichton and we've already been hit with two IPs repeating the edit warring that caused it in the first place. We made need permanent protection. Glaucus ( talk) 16:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
|
Take it to the article talk page |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
hello, could you please not delete my edit? If you feel its not neutral or its promotional kindly edit it to be neutral. I personally don't see it this way, on the page of every approved medicine by the fda there is a mention of the name of the company which developed it. See for example prozac or tadalafil. This gel isn't alternative medicine, it is a mainstream drug, just as any other drug. It can be prescribed by normal doctors. Its fda approved. 70.39.186.229 ( talk) 08:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)ryanspir
FDA is an independent source. It's not FDA "letters". It's FDA official approval. I'm Ryanspir and I'm not a part of that company and has nothing to do with colloidal silver. I just want the information provided on this page to be unbiased and updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 15:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC) PromotionHello, I'm not promoting commercial product. I didn't write for example that it cures all or anything. 1. I think you are mistaken. Any FDA approved drug may and should have info about it on wikipedia. Please look prozac or cialis articles for example. They do contain info about the manufacturer. I don't see any reason why FDA approved drugs containing colloidal silver product should be treated differently. I did provide a link to their website, because meanwhile this company has no entry in wikipedia. However, once the entry will be created I'll change the link. 2. "Silver is also promoted within alternative medicine in the form of colloidal silver, although it has not been shown to be safe or effective.[1]" This is what is written in the lead. This became absolutely false and misleading all the readers from the year of 2009 when FDA approved this form of colloidal silver. *It is a regular drug now, which can and is prescribed by the doctor. Do you agree with me? Because the fact of FDA approval makes it impossible to consider this variant of colloidal silver as not safe or as not effective. Are we together? 3. The whole article about colloidal silver is written in very bad, biased and in negative way. Why wouldn't you fix that? Looking at the talk page it's not only me who holds this opinion. Its currently written in a way, that shows that colloidal silver is mainly quackery and it may turn you blue and create side-effects. Did you ever hear that FDA will approve quackery drugs? Did you ever hear that EPA will approve quackery agents and allow them to be used by hospitals in the US? This article should be edited in the light of FDA approval of colloidal silver in 2009. We know also that FDA is not a fan of approving colloidal silver, it took years for it to be approved. So we can easily deduct that the company have provided enough scientific evidence to FDA supporting it's claims. 4. I have just listed the facts in my edit and I was very brief. Saying for example that this is the first colloidal silver approved by FDA is not a promotion, it's a fact. Listing of the patents, besides including additional info for the interested user also shows that silver sol is a variation of colloidal silver. 5. "In August 1999, the FDA banned colloidal silver sellers from claiming any therapeutic or preventive value for the product..". As you see, HERE you are satisfied that if FDA said so, no additional independent sources are needed in order to state that fact on wikipedia. So, in 2009 FDA has reversed it's position by granting its approval. It's obvious that the cited information is wrong now and outdated from 2009 and till this moment. 6. Etc, etc, etc. There is so many things that are currently wrong in the article and I can talk for ages. So I was a bit shocked that you have reversed my edit which contains updated factual information while at the same time you do allow all the wrong and well outdated info to stay on the page. Most of the cited negative publications were written well prior to 2009. But the medical community is advancing, new forms of colloidal silvers being developed which wikipedia should reflect.
If you would like me anything to change or add, please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Colloidal silver nonsenseHaha :-). I caught you red handed. When you say colloidal silver nonsense it shows that you are personally biased regarding the subject. As a result of this the article contains wrong info and doesn't contain the right info. I suggest you inhibit yourself from watchlisting this article. Alternatively, lets elevate it further. The link i provided is not fda memo. Its the official fda approval. Any drug as long as its fda approved has the right to be listed as a drug on the wikipedia, it doesn't matter if its for internal or external use. Interestingly enough, when it was said previously that fda warns about using cs, now that was simple a letter and yet you allowed this statement to exist on the page. You are using double standards. :) also, about us patent, do you think they have no verification process? Anyone can create a snake oil for treating humans and they will issue a patent for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.173 ( talk) 18:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Bias and double standartsi'm sure that if i would add additional warnings around the sections and cite fda letters or memos, you wouldn't object. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.209 ( talk) 19:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC) To talkstalkerHaha :). The link you have provided is for international patents and indeed it mentions some hits for perpetual motion. However same search on US Patent site didn't show any hits. Probably some countries have less stringent rules for inclusion. So sorry, but even on this side point no win :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.173 ( talk) 22:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Wp:medrsi hope i'm signed now. Lets look at subject. It says: statements from nation or internation recognized expert bodies. So, will you contradict that fda is such a body? Or you contradict the fact that the link which i provided clearly allows the company to distribute the cs gel in us and it also specifies the indications as it is done by fda for any drug? Isn't that link even if it would be a memo or a letter doesn't show the position of fda regarding the product? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 22:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Patents for talk stalkerhehe :). I cannot see any approved patent for perpetual motion. It seems that the link you provided also lists simply submitted and not approved patents. :) i'm still winning on this point unless you can provide seven digit number for an approved us patent for perpetual motion in the last ten years. :) 70.39.186.237 ( talk) 08:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Ryanspir Please read thishttp://lifesilver.com/testimony.htm This link contains u.S congressional report about silver sol. As they state a copy of this can be found at library of congress. An additional resource is http://silversol.soundconcepts.com/faqs.aspx as of special interest for you read statement of surgeon general of us airforce pk carlton md who recommends it being used in military and the protection of the civilians. Sorry cannot sign, some issue in my mobile phone, ryanspir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
|
Neutral opinions
Please read this Washington Post opinion:
A good deal for the District and Puerto Rico
Please read The New York Times Opinion:
Will Puerto Rico Be America’s 51st State?
Please read the Boston Herald Opinion:
Puerto Rican statehood By Boston Herald Editorial Staff — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.82.115 ( talk) 01:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
So can you put back my edit? In Wp:medrs it says OR, not and. Thus fda position statement shall suffice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.144.184.146 ( talk) 07:07, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Could you please put back my edit regarding section Silver Sol which you have removed? This is in light of the additional explanation and the correct adherence of my edit to wp:medrs. A quote from WP:MEDRS - "Ideal sources for biomedical material include general or systematic reviews in reliable, third-party, published sources, such as reputable medical journals, widely recognised standard textbooks written by experts in a field, or medical guidelines and position statements from nationally or internationally recognised expert bodies." Please see "or" before the word medical, which means position statements from nationally or internationally recognized expert bodies is sufficient. The link to FDA approval letter for ASAP silver sol gel is the position statetemnt of FDA, which is a recognized expert body. That letter says that FDA recognizes it as an official drug and allows it's sell in the country and use/prescription.
1 - This is a database of FDA clearances. Kindly seach entry: DEVICE: ASAP ANTIMICROBIAL SILVER WOUND DRESSING GEL.
In addition: [www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf8/K082333.pdf Quote:] "We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce.." Please reflect upon: "..have determined the device is substantially equivalent.."
Ryanspir ( talk) 13:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)ryanspir
Dear Vsmith,
Dougweller wrote to me, that it is not possible to insert a link to a publication without owning the copy-right, because this would be a copyright-violation. So if you delete links inserted by the copyrightholders themselves calling it self-publication, you cannot insert any links at all. Then all articles you referred to in the "Notes" are eiter self-publications or copyright-violations, and there are many links to various scientific artiles on your pages.
Yours sincerely - Geomensch
You dont want only outdated historical literature on Wikipedia, do you? Kind regards - Geomensch
Geomensch ( talk) 08:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Dear Vsmith,
DougWeller wrote to me, that he thought the linking to the PDF supposively was a copyright violation and therefore he removed it from the Wikipedi page. He asked me, if I have the copyright or not and he gave me a warning because of an assumed copyright-violation, that did not happen as we now know. The link was inserted again and he accepted. No reason for deletion exists.
Please read the impressum on page 1: All rights reserved to the author. Although to book can be bought from Amazon and from many other book-stores, I keep the right to give it as PDF as free contribution to the geoscientists. The editor Books on Demand did not get the copyright for it. This is unusual, I know. But Books on Demand allows the authors to keep all the rights and then publish the work with another editor. I can give this to a scientific journal and then I will give the copyright to them. As long as I don't do this, I can improve the content by the feed-back of all my colleagues all over the world. As it has an ISBN, I can show it to anyone without any danger of plagiarism. This is, what I did for some time and know the work is complete.
There is no conflict of interest because Amazon does NOT have any right to be the only one to sell the book. There are other book-stores who sell it as well. Everyone can make his own price. They can sell it cheeper or more expensive or give it for free if they want to. The only person, who has rights is me. I can make this available as a gift without violating any rights of any other person because they don't have them. Only after giving it to a journal, the copyright belongs to the journal.
Now my question to you: Were all the articles linked to on Wikipedia linked by the editors of these journals themselves as copyright-owners? Who did it? Anyone can do this, if the article can be read for free and the journal does not take a fee. Some articles cost a fee. For others free access is provided. This is the decision of the copyright-owner alone.
"We don't use Wikipedia to promote our own stuff". Whose "stuff" should it be? What will you do, when someone else inserts a link to my article? The question is not, to whom something belongs, but if the scientific quality is good. This is the most and only important criteria. If the Bibliography on the Wikipedia-page about Earth Expansion is considered a "collection of crazy ideas" anyways, then Wikipedia can very well add another new crazy idea to it. Beleive me, there are much more worthy places for this link than here.
My new publication has been read by so many thousands of scientists already. It is going all over the world and taken notice of with high appreciation, as I was able to end the conflict between crazy earth-expansion theories and today's knowledge about plate tectonics. I have had heavy scientific discussions with expansionists teaching things completely out of scope, as I wrote in the book. The historical importance of this work is a very good reason to add it to the Wikipedia-Bibliography. Even about a probably outdated theory the list of literature should not be outdated. In the first place it should be complete.
Kind regards - Geomensch Geomensch ( talk) 08:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
This warning comes routinely from the upload area for every document, because the upload area cannot take the responsibility for the downloads. If you answer "yes" that you want to do the download, everything will be okay. If this warning appears in big red letters for other users, this might be irritating and must be changed. So what would you suggest?
Geomensch ( talk) 15:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Kindly reply on the talk page of the medical uses of silver regarding medrs. Ryanspir ( talk) 04:46, 30 November 2012 (UTC)Ryanspir
kindly reply on medical uses of silver talk page Ryanspir ( talk) 18:19, 3 December 2012 (UTC)ryanspir
Hello, I just saw you blocked User:208.108.129.140 from editing - thanks. Would you mind dropping an appropriate template on their Talk page? This would indicate that this IP no longer needs to be reported to admins. Thanks. kashmiri 00:55, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
This is how reliable peer-reviews are :-DDD
Earth Formation ( talk) 16:10, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
I wanted to wish you a Merry Christmas. Your name pops up frequently on my watchlist and, although I haven't really interacted with you much, the few conversations we've had have been quite pleasant. Thanks for that, and for all your work at stopping vandals. I hope the coming year is a great one for you. Zaereth ( talk) 02:15, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Quacod ( talk • contribs) 11:20, 23 December 2012
You were talking to a sock there. Dougweller ( talk) 15:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith! I was wondering if you have time to take another look at meteoric iron and assess if it is already B-class or what it still needs to reach it. -- Tobias1984 ( talk) 16:42, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey Vsmith! Me again ;). I was wondering if you would like to take a look at keilite. You were so helpful with daubréelite, so I thought you might be interested in this one (although i see that you already visited the page once). -- Tobias1984 ( talk) 17:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thumb|Beetle in Pine AZ Back in August 2011, you removed this photo from the Pine, AZ article. I keep meaning to write you to ask if you would reconsider. I think it's a pretty cool shot, and Pine isn't an over-illustrated article. Only gas station in Pine, ims. Best, Pete Tillman ( talk) 20:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
We have someone looking at this for FAC preparation. Casliber is commenting on the article talk page. Here's a comment about the mineralogy section you may want to look at. PumpkinSky talk 12:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith. Happy New Year. Please view older discussion of September 2011 on your page. I just checked the comments on my request for deletion: no comments whatsoever in 3 months. Furthermore I checked the page Mark Schneider (designer) and it was not only edited by one person, it was recently edited by a specific user named SchneiderDesign. So I think there can be little ambiguity the whole page has been set up from the start as a self promotional page. How to deal with this? I furthermore see that cathy waterman has ALSO recently been edited (more or less same dates) by an anonymous user who only edited this page and nothing else. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/74.109.30.77. So it seems to me there's sufficient ammo to argue that the three pages I mentioned a few months ago have in fact been self-promotional pages? Gem-fanat ( talk) 00:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
How occassionally you may think a word means one thing, but it really means another?
I've been calling provinces providences for years now...jeez. Thanks for fixing my errors, haha. What Wikipedia will teach you. Res Mar 03:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
See User:PumpkinSky/Sandbox. Links are about the [{Evanston Formation]], well not new, but only a couple lines in it. Seems to be lots of info on this. But I cannot find a free image of anything I know for sure is one of its outcroppings. Are you in terested in working together on this? PumpkinSky talk 01:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
FYI, I warned the IP who made the edit that you reverted recently at Speed of Light with subst:uw-disruptive1. I tried to find a better warning template but there doesn't seem to be a template specifically for warning someone for inserting inappropriate content in references. If you can think of a better template to use then please let me know. Thanks! Pine talk 08:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
On 7 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wilson Butte Cave, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that discoveries in Wilson Butte Cave in Idaho, which formed as a lava tube, include both camel bones and the oldest evidence of human presence on the Snake River Plain? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wilson Butte Cave.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. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Neenach Volcano, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coastal Range ( 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) 11:27, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Your attention is requested here: Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Reshoot_of_Yogo_sapphires. PumpkinSky talk 23:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Please have a look at the edit history on this page for Ana_de_Mendonça. This is becoming an ongoing unproductive edit war. Everything I enter is taken from sources yet mr Davide1941 sees it his job to re vert everything I touch. I am getting ready to walk away from editing here a tall, but who will protect the articles from such uninformed edits? Colon-el-Nuevo ( talk) 00:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello Vsmith, greetings in 2012 ;) Could you move Raton hotspot to Jemez Lineament, please. Or do you think Raton hotspot trail would be a better title? Peter W. Lipman (p. 166) says that there is no systematic progression of age, ruling out a hotspot origin (Continental tectonics: Studies in geophysics: Study of Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems; authors: Assembly of Mathematical and Physical Sciences (U.S.). Geophysics Study Committee, National Research Council (U.S.). Geophysics Study Committee, 1980, pp. 197; Chapter 14: Cenozoic Volcanism in the Western United States: Implications for Continetal Tectonics, Peter W. Lipman [1]). Thx -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 09:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
As a volcano writer i think its important for people to Access info on volcanoes (historically active volcanoes are my Forte)i have written many articles of the past years.
This is just a thankyou, to say thanks for your help in my articles on volcanoes.
Regards, Noble Fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 10:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 13:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Kunlun Volcanic Group
Also, thanks for looking through my pages and contributing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 16:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
[2] Your recent actions have been reported to ANI. Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:09, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Did the 48 hour block include an allowance for the SOPA blackout? Nobody Ent 00:35, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
See Talk:Yogo_sapphire#Latest_pear_and_purple_photos. Hope you think they're better, and just in time for the Great Wiki Blackout of jan 2012! PumpkinSky talk 01:05, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
I actually like [3] this image better than the previous, because of natural colors (without that artificial blueishness). It is said to be sugar, but I guess the caption can be changed. Thoughts? Materialscientist ( talk) 00:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Todorokite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carinthia ( 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) 12:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
in edit mode..."These rhombohedrons are almost always less than 1 mm in thickness and appear like striations. [1] --and this matters because...?" and " en echelon segments. --do we know what an en echelon segment is? Can't find anything on wiki..." Can you answer these? PumpkinSky talk 04:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your welcoming message. As a Vietnam veteran myself (1965), I appreciate your response. I am a little confused though. I made a change to a bibliography entry on the Extinction events page on 1/21. When I viewed the page today, that entry doesn't seem to be there. I don't know if I'm getting senile or if I did something wrong. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstheorist ( talk • contribs) 16:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, After all the many prior warnings at
this IP, especially the last warning given by another admin earlier this month, I am curious why you appear to have just given yet another warning, instead of imposing a rootin' tootin' schoolblock? As a former juvvie rehab
Outward Bound instructor, I can tell you that when the kids hear "last" it must have teeth and it must stick, else you just dig a deeper hole and do the kids themselves a gross disservice. FYI, I am leaving
a link to this question on the talk page of the admin who previously posted a "last" warning on that IP's talk page.
NewsAndEventsGuy (
talk) 17:09, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Edit conflict; I had just tried to post the following....
Nevermind, and I apologize. I belatedly realized that you did impose a rootin' tootin' schoolblock. I was confused by the template text "Due to persistent vandalism anonymous editing from your school, library, or educational institution's IP address might be disabled." (bold supplied) Being unfamiliar with the schoolblock concept, I erroneously read the word "might" to mean yet another warning, and I now realize my error. Thanks for giving this IP a well deserved softblock.
NewsAndEventsGuy (
talk) 17:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, can you expand this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Why did you undo my changes in the Kevin Trenberth article? Do you really believe that the Climategate scandal is an irrelevant detail of his life? Do you really believe that his famous E-mails don't deserve encyclopedic diffusion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.36.31.114 ( talk) 16:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello Vsmith. Just wanted to say thank for the revert of the trolling on my talk page. I should have left this yesterday but a hectic weekend off wiki and on got in the way. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 22:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, we have a little trouble on the Yogo Sapphire article. PumpkinSky has quit over some of his other articles having a concern that he did some too-close paraphrasing from source material and they've now put everything he's written onto a list to be checked for copyright violations. As you are the only other person on the Yogo article with a hardcopy of Voynick, I think, I know it's a lot to ask, but can you check the pages cited in the article to see if we have too close a verbatim phrasing? If so, feel free to tweak, or -- as I DO NOT have a copy of the book-- I would be glad to do the fixes and have you check to be sure I didn't change the nuance. This article is too good to be tossed as a potential copyvio. I can also look to some of those other web sites for backup support of the Voynick sources if needed. I spent way too damn long on those photos to have this article get trashed and all the Voynick material thrown out for lack of backup verification. (sigh) Help!! Montanabw (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I know you are probably very busy but here are a few pages i've created.
Noble Fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 19:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
This edit comment was apparently a reference to your 2008 redirect from Tar sands. The IP's contribs are perhaps just trying to right wp:GREATWRONGS, but it's certainly annoying. LeadSongDog come howl! 06:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
The page has been updated. Could you review the same. Ankaraman ( talk) 17:12, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Would you mind spending some time to review the article? Many thnaks. Ankaraman ( talk) 10:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Why stop me telling the truth? Can you prove its not true or are you being bias? ( 178.63.32.109 ( talk) 05:03, 8 February 2012 (UTC))
Do you even read or look at what edits you revert? Or read the edit summaries? Because it seems like you don't.
You reverted my correction of a redlink with a summary of "
no need for repeat of an image here." Alright then: I remove the image link as there is "no need for repeat". So now you tell me I should
fixed it?? However, you "fixed" it
in the wrong place.
Now, as far as I'm concerned, the redlink was removed so the article now is fine. But please reconsider your approach. Maxim
(talk) 20:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
See Talk:Cahokia and Talk:Native Americans in the United States. Dougweller ( talk) 06:58, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Sometime last year I found a molybdenium mine in Temagami ( Barton Mine) and a rock there that has silvery grey mineralization on it. For some time I have been wondering if this might be molybdenite. From looking at it sideways it looks like it might have a layered structure (kind of hard to tell because it's broken) and it can be used for writing like graphite. I do not know too much about minerals so I am asking you because you are a geologist. Volcano guy 21:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
This is the first time I have tried to edit an article on Wikipedia and could use your help. The info in the Tenmile Range article is incorrect as to peak names and locations. The incorrect information appears in the article in two different places.
I am a twenty five year resident of Dillon, Colorado and look right out on the Tenmile Range which I have hiked, biked, and skied extensively. The range is approximately ten miles long and has over a dozen peaks. The northernmost peak is Ten Mile peak. Next south are the numbered peaks, Peak One - Peak Ten. Quandary Peak is the southernmost peak and highest point at 14,265 feet.
This information may be verified in the following books (and many others): Colorado Atlas & Gazetteer, DeLorme Publishing, 1998, Yarmouth, ME ISBN 0-89933-265-X 19916 00285 Guide to the Colorado Mountains by Robert M. Ormes, pub by the Colo Mountain Club ISBN 1-55566-194-7 781555 661946
Can you help me get this information corrected? Thanks. Eztg9PmW ( talk) 01:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
3 New Pages i've created.
I'm probably getting on your nerves, but you can look through them if you want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 15:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, there is an edit war there - but look at the background. In the shape of User:Bjmullan we have someone who identifies articles containing the words British Isles then fact tags that usage so that he can return at a later date to delete it. Yes, stuff must be verifiable and referenced, but when such a need is used to "game the system" as is were, then the encyclopedia is the worse for it. There are many types of usage I would prefer not to see, but to go around fact tagging them would be just irresponsible. I note you've taken out the disputed sentence; all well and good. It was finally referenced and I'll read up on this to see whether it might be appropriate to reinstate it; it could be, I don't know. CommonPAS ( talk) 16:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Vsmith,
My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC) Young June Sah -- Yjune.sah ( talk) 22:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder about the merge tag. Who knows when I would have realized that myself. ZybthRanger (talk) (contribs) 18:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith Wondered why you had capitalised 'era' to 'Era' at Tertiary. Isn't the standard approach to keep the nouns in lower case ie era, eon, period, epoch etc rather than Era, Eon, Period, Epoch? thanks Geopersona ( talk) 07:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Not only poorly formatted but also plagiarized. Spinning Spark 00:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
The article Religious interpretations of the Big Bang theory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
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.
Viriditas (
talk) 02:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Caithness Flagstone Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lacustrine ( 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) 10:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
Thanks a lot for taking the time to revert KUB's edit on my user page! It seems KUB doesn't like me any more, I'm so very sad about it:)
God, this guy is a real pain! Anyway, thanks again, and see you around! Next time is on me! ConradMayhew ( talk) 20:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Are you Mr. Smith?
I think you were my high school science teacher...
-- MaxAMSC ( talk) 21:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for removing my goof — my wife interrupted me. I agree with removal of trivia, as previously discussed on the talk page there. In light of Little Ice Age and Other observations, my intent was to add a new Significant concurrent events, starting with Lan_Xang#Latter_years where I have already put a link to the Maunder Minimum. In light of what's going on today, I think it important to link significant climatic events to articles on concurrent collapse of kingdoms and empires, and vice versa. In many articles, this has already been done. This is my first feeble attempt. I'll put a paraphrase of this at Maunder's talk and see what others say there. -- Pawyilee ( talk) 15:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Just a thank you for added info to the Tor Zawar page. I actually forgot to add the bit about the quake. I have actually produced my own study (PDF) of the volcano (using whatever i could find online and in books) called "Geology and Aspects of The 2010 Tor Zawar Eruption"
I can't send it to you unless i have your e-mail, but it dosn't matter.
Regards, Noble Fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noble fan ( talk • contribs) 15:07, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rocks and minerals#Zinnwaldite is it ok? I personally don't like articles on discredited minerals. -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 09:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Cheers for that, sorry about deleting those references. DaHuzyBru ( talk) 15:44, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith. Wanted to say thanks for rewriting the geology development of Yule Marble. A vast improvement to the article. I originally inserted the USGS section into the article because a rewrite was beyond my knowledge. I also removed the 24 hour clock from the timeline and the line with homo sapien development OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 03:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, Wow! that was fast!!I am mega impressed with the way volunteers peruse and check new contributions so meticulously.In answer to your question concerning my second reference: "Aspects of the history of Copper mining in Namaqualand" by John M Smalberger. That reference was intended to apply to the Stub , Concordia, one of the 2 places in SA where Orbicular Granite occurrs. I intend to expand the stub on this obscure little town listed below the article as one of the few places where this rare type of rock occurrs. Because I am a "Wiki virgin" , you will have to excuse me still getting to grips with how to edit efficiently. Glad to make your aquaintence and thanks for bringing my attention to this error.Look forward to further interaction in the future. Have a good day trying to get Teenagers interessted in anything at all besides gaming! (laughing) Warm regards-- Gregoryclivedunn ( talk) 11:10, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
An article you have made significant contributions to, ( transitional fossil), is up for Talk:Transitional fossil/GA1GA review. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 06:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, I am currently a student at Clemson University and I am taking English 103. Our current assignment is to write a Wikipedia article, and I was wondering if you could take some time to read what I have started and give me some feedback! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrifaction Thanks! Ajdu93 ( talk) 03:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
First of all, thank you for your input! Your help is very much appreciated. I do want to let you know that what I have written so far is only about half of the assignment. I'll be finishing this week, which is why there is currently only one process under the "Processes" section. As for the terminology confusion, based on my research, petrification is comprised of two processes, one of which is permineralization. I checked the source the previous author used for that statement and found that the author did not include everything and the source does indeed say that petrification includes two subprocesses. Again I want to thank you for your time and input! Ajdu93 ( talk) 00:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Just thought you would like to see the new list I made for the Temagami mines. The see also section on all Temagami mine articles was getting long so I removed all of the mines and replaced them with the list. More organized IMO. I still need to do some work on the list and make an article for the 1906 Priest Mine on Cross Lake (an inclined shaft also goes under the lake). Volcano guy 08:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Hystrix asked me on the April 1st to candidate for Admin on Commons. I'd like to hear one or two advices from u. Thx n cheers -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 02:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
100,000 Edits | ||
Congratulations on reaching 100,000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have accomplished. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work! – From:
Northamerica1000
(talk) 20:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
|
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is " Electromagnetic radiation". Thank you. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 15:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
I am wondering if, as an administrator, you can be of any further help in resolving the issue with User:Syamsu at Free will, besides just helping revert his war edits as you have this morning.
He has been pushing this edit for over three years, and editing almost nothing else, ever; almost every time he surfaces to pick up the war, he repeatedly violates 3RR; he has been warned for 3RR violations at least four times recently on his talk page; temporarily blocked twice for them; created a sock puppet which was also blocked; and now today, after the last block expired, immediately picked up the war again (six reverts so far today, even after another 3RR warning); and now flatly refuses to address concerns on talk, insisting that he has "said enough to build consensus" and that every other editor of that article, who unanimously disagree with his edits, must be banned for not going along with him.
It's becoming a real farce, and I think some kind of administrative intervention or something is required at this point. He's entirely recalcitrant and I don't know that even another temporary block will help, given his non-response to the recent ones.
Any ideas for how to address this problem?
Thanks, -- Pfhorrest ( talk) 18:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your assist. . . Is it the standard to put book references in the external links section? I, at least edited the link title to reflect the full text version of the title instead of the abbreviated version.
Thanks again Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.22.138 ( talk) 02:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
So that's really the convention? Guess I've been doing it wrong for 50 years! Oh, well.... -- Pete Tillman ( talk) 23:12, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Excuse me. Why did you undo absolutely everything I added to the Nicaragua page even though it was all solid? -- Horhey420 ( talk) 10:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah I noticed. I apolagize. Should've figured it had something to do with that ref error. -- Horhey420 ( talk) 11:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 21:06, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks for both the technical expertise you gave on the geology parts of this and the paraphrasing checks. I do appreciate it. PumpkinSky talk 20:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
TFX Associates is a non-commercial independent collaborative of 16 senior scientists and engineers. The external links that you disabled are to informational webpages. The objective of TFX Associates is to inform and engage like minded researchers in an active discussion on topics of mutual interest. Please cease and desist. Wikipedia dispute resolution has been informed. Thank you.
Edward Bigelow PhD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.244.140 ( talk) 00:42, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
External Links Deleted
Ref. links. Plasma acceleration, Remote sensing, Reconfigurable computing, Sniping — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.244.140 ( talk) 00:50, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I am humbled (and thankful) for the hours of work you've expended to help make the Algoman orogeny article a GA. Bettymnz4 ( talk) 13:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
I've answered all the inline questions. Pls review for further improvement. PumpkinSky talk 22:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Here is a pic of the sample I found at Barton Mine. Volcano guy 19:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Are any further improvements needed to Yogo sapphire? PumpkinSky talk 22:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello.
Hydrophilite (Y: 1813, discredited IMA 2006) isn't IMA/CNMNC approved, discredited as its description is incomplete. It's existence is questioned. It's probably identical with antarcticite (a redirect to
calcium chloride, IMA 1965-015, CaCl2·6H2O) or sinjarite (too a redirect to calcium chloride, IMA 1979-041, CaCl2·2H2O). What do you think? Regards --
Chris.urs-o (
talk) 11:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Done. Antarcticite :) Vsmith ( talk) 15:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for moving the TOC at the bottom of List of geologists - I don't know why I didn't notice that. Mikenorton ( talk) 12:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Christianity and environmentalism#User talk:97.87.29.188.23May 2012 ... 141.218.36.85 ( talk) 02:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
It's a much better link. I swear, between you and MaterialScientist these articles are improving by leaps and bounds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riventree ( talk • contribs) 09:15, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Geology for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. - Mabeenot ( talk) 22:44, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Pls see User:Wehwalt/Sandbox6, it'll be part of the PR. Can you help with the "alluvial" comment? PumpkinSky talk 22:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear VSmith, Please consult with me prior to annulling many hours of my work! I made it clear that Citation was necessary, and will add more refs. as I find them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magazine1212 ( talk • contribs) 00:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know this article is now at WP:FAC. Link at: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yogo sapphire/archive1. Thank you so much for helping get it there. Improvements welcome. PumpkinSky talk 00:35, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Do you have access to this article
Keith A. Mychaluk, 1995, The Yogo Sapphire Deposit, Gems & Gemology all I can see is the abstract.
Also it seems the other MS thesis is the one I've seen referenced.
James P. Dahy, 1988 The Geology and Igneous Rocks of the Yogo Sapphire Deposit and the Surrounding Area, Little Belt Mountains, Judith Basin County, Montana, Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology, Butte, but haven't found an online version. The Gems & Gemology article above references it.
Also see
[5] referring to a guidebook article on the Yogo dist. by Dahy and more stuff. The guidebook article (I think)
Dahy article here (item #4)
In case anyone has access to those.
Vsmith (
talk) 04:16, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
And Keith A. Mychaluk, Geology of the Vortex Sapphire Mine, Utica, Montana, University of Calgary, Dept. of Geology and Geophysics, 1992 ... Vsmith ( talk) 04:37, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Just checking to see if you can help with some of the comments in the peer review. The most problemic is the one about the gossan distorting mineralization potental. Volcano guy 05:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
On the Acid Mine Drainage page, you attribute the bogus change in question to Woohookitty, but they appear to be the anonymous edit following WHK's changes. I am not WHK, so I have no dog in this fight, I just noticed the log entry when I was following up on some of my previous edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riventree ( talk • contribs) 07:19, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello there. Would like to address your concerns about the Zultanite page (also some of this on Talk page Talk:Zultanite).
Appreciate your help in this. -- Jeffmcneill ( talk) 08:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
geology | |
Thank you for polishing this gem with your profound geological knowledge, as part of more the 100.000 valuable edits to the project, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC) |
Hi,
Can you please explain why you have removed the part about Prevalin containing Bentonite? If you need proof that it does contain Bentonite, then that can be found here: http://www.boots.com/wcsstore/cmsassets/Boots/Content/Products/Allergy%20Hayfever%20-%20CAT:%20A00000586/10124276.P/Prevalin%20Allergy.pdf
Would this link be ok? http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/allergy-and-asthma/medicines/prevalin-allergy.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexyjw ( talk • contribs) 08:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
It seems a shame to have a medical section about Bentonite with a glaring omission.
Thanks
John - in no way affiliated with Prevalin, apart from having been squirting it up my nose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexyjw ( talk • contribs) 08:13, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
You are mentioned on Talk:Christianity and environmentalism. 99.181.140.207 ( talk) 04:16, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
For your outstanding support and dedication in getting Yogo sapphire from a new article to DYK to GA to FA and FOUR. The team effort of the uncountable people involved in getting this unique article to FA is a textbook case of teamwork in article improvement, ie, what Wikipedia should be, not what it all too often is. I can never thank everyone enough. PumpkinSky talk 23:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC) |
Thank you for your recent articles, including Narsarsukite. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Wikipedia:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC) |
Dear Sir,
I have added just two links to each of two Wiki articles, each link being to a relevant page that gives further information on the topic concerned.
This is in accordance with what I have been given to understand is an acceptable practice that enhances Wikipedia.
Please advise if you consider this to be unacceptable and why.
Philip227 ( talk) 14:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)Philip Gegan Philip227 ( talk) 14:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Very glad to have your input on various topics around Diatoms. There is a wholesale lack of ecological/ scientific awareness with one notable editor whose CV suggests he may have trained as an accountant. Your support is much appreciated. Velella Velella Talk 23:27, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
You had deleted the citation to D Mann's 1999 paper on the share of diatoms to primary production in oceans. So I emailed Dr Mann and asked him and his reply is given below. He has also marked this email to Diatom-l list.
David Mann <removed address> 2:48 PM (58 minutes ago)
to diatom-l, me Dear Bhaskar (copied to diatom-l, in case anyone else has been bothered by the same question).
Thanks for your enquiry. You are quite correct: Field et al. do not give the 40-45% figure. However, the passage in Mann 1999 is, as you will have seen:
“Recent estimates of global net primary production suggest an overall total of 105 Pg (105 X 10^15 g) of carbon fixed per year, of which 46% is oceanic and 54% is terrestrial (Field et at. 1998). Of the oceanic component, approximately one-quarter takes place in oligotrophic regions where diatoms account for no more than 25-30% of primary production (Nelson et at. 1995) ; but in highly productive areas, diatoms predominate. Overall, therefore, it might not be unreasonable to estimate that diatoms could account for between 40 and 45% of oceanic production, producing perhaps 20 Pg of carbon per year, making them more productive than all the world's tropical rainforests (Field et al. 1998).”
The statement “it might not be unreasonable to estimate” was not meant to be linked to Field et al.: the final reference to Field et al. refers to the productivity of tropical rainforests, not to the calculation for diatoms. There’s no doubt that I should have been more careful in explaining and referencing the calculations and I clarify this below. However, if I had meant that Field et al. had made the 40-45% estimate, I hope I would have given the Field et al. reference after “oceanic production”, or 20 Pg C per year.
I have noticed that, in several papers on diatoms, the 40-45% figure, or the simple derivative, that diatoms account for c. 40–45/46% = c. 20% of total global primary production, is referenced to Field et al. and Nelson et al., whereas in fact neither of these papers give this figure: it is possible that the people citing these papers have not actually read them, or have not read them carefully and are instead relying on other people, who have also not read them. Field et al. do not separate the diatom contribution. Nelson et al. do separate it (the focus of their paper is the silica cycle), but, as far as I can remember and I have just checked again, Nelson et al. never give an overall percentage contribution of diatoms to total oceanic C production (see their p. 361): the only 40-45% figure they give (on p. 364) is for net export of biogenic silica. However, even though one is not supplied by Nelson et al, a % figure for the proportion of total oceanic C production is easily obtained from their paper, since they estimate 26 Gt C yr-1 for the diatom contribution to the 60 Gt C yr-1 that they assumed for all oceanic primary production, i.e. 26/60= 43.3%.
Field et al. gave new estimates for the total global productivities of land and ocean, and of the different regions/biomes on land and in the sea. These overall totals were thought to be more accurate than the previous estimates (e.g. revising the overall estimate of 60 Gt C yr-1 for oceanic production used by Nelson et al.). Hence it was necessary to recalculate the diatom contribution to global C production, using the new Field et al. totals . There seemed no reason to doubt the calculations of the *relative* contribution of diatoms in different oceanic zones made by Nelson et al., but unfortunately the classification of the oceans used by Field et al (oligotrophic, mesotrophic and eutrophic) did not correspond to the classification by Nelson et al. (oligotrophic vs coastal + nutrient-rich). So, to use Nelson et al.’s data for calculating the diatom contribution to the overall productivities estimated by Field et al., I made some simple rough recalculations (‘guesstimates’) for Mann 1999, resulting in the sentence “Overall, therefore, it might not be unreasonable to estimate that diatoms could account for between 40 and 45% of oceanic production”.
Please see “Global significance” at http://www.tolweb.org/Diatoms/21810 for a further explanation.
I think I sent something similar about this to Diatom-L in the early 2000s…
Best wishes, David Mann
Senior Principal Research Scientist Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh
<removed address> websites http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/algae/ http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/DIADIST/ http://rbg-web2.rbge.org.uk/ADIAC/ http://www.rbge.org.uk/rbge/web/science/research/crypto/index.jsp
From: Bhaskar M V <removed address> Sent: 27 June 2012 08:33 To: David Mann Subject: Diatom algae
Dear Dr Mann
I read your 1999 paper 'Species concept in Diatoms'. This says that 40 to 45 % of the primary production in oceans is by diatoms, and Field et. al. 1998 is cited.
I could not find any reference to Diatoms in the paper cited - Christopher B. Field, et al. Primary Production of the Biosphere: Integrating Terrestrial and Oceanic Components Science 281, 237 (1998);
The wikipedia entry for Diatoms says - "They are especially important in oceans, where they are estimated to contribute up to 45% of the total oceanic primary production.[citation needed]"
Can you please clarify this point.
regards
Bhaskar www.nualgi.com/new — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diatom1 ( talk • contribs) 10:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi VSmith, may I ask you to have a look at the International School of Gemology page history? I need a second opinion on the latest edits by TParis, preferably from someone with a geology background. My well researched and verifiable article, albeit non-flattering for Robert James, the owner of the ISG, has been wiped off the wiki. Rock-o-solid ( talk) 15:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
VSmith,
The edits you mention describe the controversy around Mr. James. Yes, I wrote a blog post back in 08 on the subject. I am a major writer in the field. It was a balanced article that quoted a number of the most highly respected experts in the gemological community on copper diffusion in tourmaline, topaz and garnet. In writing about a controversy, balance is the best one can hope to achieve. There have been a few other edits, some to expand and some to contract the issue. It seems to me that what constitutes "disruptive editing" depends to a large degree on whether you want the controversy discussed or deleted. Mr. James and his partisans desire the latter, a couple of other editors, the former.
I read the "Reliable Source" section in Wikipedia and see no barrier to quoting from blogs, please correct me if I am wrong by directing me to the appropriate section of the article.
I also add quotes and references to articles by GIA Bangkok, as you know, no more recognized expert in the field than GIA. I note that another administrator removed another article reference that is to an article written by Mr. James himself. If you review the bibliography of the GIA Bangkok article you will find my blog referenced along with three articles by James with links that lead nowhere. This is standard op. for Mr. James. Prove him wrong and he tries to remove the evidence. In this case the article was preserved on a website critical of Mr. James. The whole thing is quite convoluted. Perhaps deletion of the page makes the most sense. It is far better than having wikipedia serve as a promotional billboard for ISG.
I decided to change my handle from GemWise to Platitude. Choosing a name is allowed on Wikipedia, why is platitude phoney and gemwise not? Sorry, always forget to sign.
Platitude 19:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
RWW — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gemwise ( talk • contribs) 19:33, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
I indeed know alot about machinery, and some manufactures. But, I edited for viki not standing for any group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loney tulip ( talk • contribs) 05:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Pine Island Glacier. Please see wp:Tea.
Were you wp:MEAT on Religion and environmentalism and Christianity and environmentalism? ;-| 99.181.159.214 ( talk) 02:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I wish I knew what this is about; see the history of Moussaieff Red Diamond, and the version of the article that constitutes the current editor's talkpage. I am frankly bewildered. I've tried starting a section on the article talkpage, which is "unavailable" in no way I can discern. Yngvadottir ( talk) 19:49, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
On Talk:Current sea level rise#Add legislation? 108.73.115.187 ( talk) 06:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
On Evangelical environmentalism you stated not to included a link within at reference title, but this happened when Climate change policy of the United States was wikilinked to explain by Special:Contributions/Arthur Rubin. Did you not intend to have the link outside the title? 108.73.115.187 ( talk) 06:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
You have erased my own personal information from my accounts Talk page?? If that doesn't constitute as "talk" I suggest you admit Wikipedia is the largest content of useless public information.
Please reinsert the information to "my" talk page.
If you Brits and your Jews do not wish to give whats mine that is on you, but remember at the end of this you have no history due to your false claims of sovereign capability.
Quote this:
"I have a Bob (bobby) and I have a Traynor (trainer). So.... I Know you "
No more bullshit, just hand it over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emplorio ( talk • contribs) 19:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Dear Vsmith,
Thank you for alerting me to some improper edits I made to the article on the Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny on Wikipedia. I have now added a number of references and sources for the material. Could you kindly remove the boxed message at the top of the page, which indicates the contrary? Thanks.
Benirschke-Perkins ( talk) 16:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting out the reflist there, this is to show my appreciation. ツ Jenova 20 ( email) 12:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC) |
Hi, I hope you can help - I received a message saying you had deleted the page referring to the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme due to the addition of copyrighted material - the update I performed simply updated the infromation that reflects the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme whom I work for. As the page has now been deleted I can't view it to see what the disputed material was, can you clarify the situation for me? Many thanks! IEAGHG ( talk) 14:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Its been a while, but I have finally got back to looking at the Aerosol article. Nearly seven years ago (! WTF!) I was proposing a merger with particulates. Most of the last 4 years on Wikipedia have been spent ploughing a lonely furrow on Cullompton which was my new home 5 years ago.
I have now decided to concentrate on making this article an overview of all aspects of aerosol science and technology. I'd appreciate your thoughts though on where I am taking the article. Note that most of sections 3 and 4 are at present the remainder of a merger from another stub article and will be rewritten with proper sources in due course. It's a bit lonely there so sny comments would be welcome.-- NHSavage ( talk) 21:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
the molweight 290.28 first mentioned on the page was indeed taken from http://webmineral.com/data/Kernite.shtml, the first ref. on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernite page. However, this molweight corresponds with the formula Na2B4O6(OH)3·3(H2O), in which (OH)3 is wrong, it should be (OH)2. Unfortunately, both (OH)2 and (OH)3 can be found on the webmineral kernite page, which seems strange... Using standard chemical tables I calculated that for Na2B4O6(OH)2·3(H2O) the molweight is 273.22. I noticed that in the past the text box was introduced on 11th June 2009, with a formula containing (OH)3 and a molweight of 290.28 (this molweight indeed corresponds with (OH)3). This was repaired by you on 19th July 2009, and the (OH)3 was changed into (OH)2; however, unfortunately the molweight was not changed then. Wjchardon ( talk) 11:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi V, thanks for your input. FYI, the example you posted was an edit warring example. The basis of my complaint is external link spamming and block evasion. I'd like to suggest that it might help the admins who review the case to see your comment broken out with a sub heading, and have it clearly spelled out that you're raising a different problem behavior from that user. Thanks for your interest. I don't edit as much when I have to wade thru that junk on my watchlist NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 15:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Just stopping by to thank you for your continued interest in trying to reform this IP's behavior. FYI, on Aug 23 the primary IP at the library was soft blocked (if soft is the word) for a year and the soft range block for what I infer is their home was extended to Nov 23. Thanks again for caring. Its sort of ironic since I've often been interested in the news stories they post and share their POV. Sure wish we could get them to interested in meaningful NPOV editing. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 12:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, by the way i was only kidding about the tieng Viet thing, i knew that you weren't Vietnamese and that you tried to write it as best you can, and i wouldn't take offense over something negligible like that, so you didn't need to apologize for that, and i hoped that you would pick up the sarcasm i placed at the end of my edit summary, but unfortunately you missed it. I will provide a review for that link as soon as i can, but i have to go back to my work now... Anyways, I'll look forward to hearing from you soon about the concern i have about this whole edit warring thing. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 19:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
As well, can you please revert the last 2 edits that Zeraful has made on the North Vietnam article, that user has added those items in without any consensus or agreement with me, where i have explicitly rejected the edit in the article's talk page (the edit regarding the Vietcong attempting to invade the South). As well, the name DRV violates the common naming policy, and should be changed back to the name North Vietnam, as very few people who read this article know what DRV means, and its the user's attempt to legitimize the North, which is POV. What this user did is against what the whole concept of consensus-building stands for. Thanks again. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 19:37, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Elizabethnorton ( talk · contribs) reverted your reverts of their commercial links at the above two articles. After checking the contents of the links and confirming they were primarily commercial in nature, I reverted to your version and left a note on their talk page. Given that they've now been warned by two editors, and gave "removed promotional links" as their rationale for material removal at Solder (showing that they're aware of policy), it should be safe to impose sanctions if they edit-war on this further.
I hope I'm wrong about the likelihood of them doing so, but they're showing all of the hallmarks of being a single-purpose account promoting a company's interests. -- Christopher Thomas ( talk) 22:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Dropped off my watchlist until I saw it pop up at WP:COIN. Dougweller ( talk) 07:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks for the semi-protection at Roger A. Pielke, Jr.. Much appreciated. Jonathan A Jones ( talk) 19:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | |
I should have studied more before making changes to this article, thanks for your quick correction and description. Sorryasshere154 ( talk) 12:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for the help with the metric numbers in the longship article!Big ups from kiwi land!1% — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.36.191 ( talk) 00:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
My bad! I meant thickness not width.Captain 1% — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.36.191 ( talk) 23:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Please see: User talk:BrightStarSky#Copyright violations, again
We've both warned the user. In fact, this user has been warned many times and persists. Please advise. Many thanks. Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 10:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Care to offer feedback on his interpretation? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 04:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback on the anecdotal medical reports. I see you are or have been in Arizona, so you might want to take a crack at reporting the medical benefits of your weather there...if you can find some studies!
Regards, Charley in San Francisco NRN — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charley sf ( talk • contribs) 13:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I see that you reversed my edit on Economics of Global Warning, to retain the space before the degree symbol. I was in the process of doing that myself, but you beat me to it. So thanks. I still think it looks odd, as I commented in the Talk page for that article. Margin1522 ( talk) 11:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you edited the Alps and I need someone have a look at the Geology section to be certain it's a.) correct and b.) readable in plain English. Do you know about geology or perhaps know someone who does? Also, if you do know, can you have a look at the bottom of the Composition section where there's still a bit that's unsourced. I have a couple of geology books but can't seem to find anything that matches with that section although it doesn't seem incorrect to me. Thanks in advance. Truthkeeper ( talk) 20:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
If those links were confusing, do you think u can ask where Lanayru is? Lanayru seems to be one of the gorges found in the desert and its located somewhere.-- 75.142.67.97 ( talk) 01:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I've been expanding the mineral article, and was wondering if you could take a look at what I've done, what I've screwed up (hopefully not much!), and what I'm missing or have too much of. I've been thinking of adding perhaps a bit on more advanced mineral ID (e.g. optical mineralogy, XRF, electron or ion microprobes, spectroscopy, and so on), and maybe more on mineral environments and associations; however, in a general article like this, perhaps the advanced stuff would go better in to mineralogy, and environments and associations might be veering too much into describing geology as opposed to discussing minerals. Thanks, Maxim (talk) 17:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
Thanks for the additions to the telluric iron article. That looks good. I'm glad you were able to find pictures for it, because it'll save me from having to go to Greenland and take them myself. :-D I'm not a geologist, and knew nothing about the subject when I started the article. I was mainly looking into the history of steel, (one of the subjects I know best), when I stumbled across the info about telluric iron, and really thought it should have its own article. I'm glad to see a real mineralogist helping to expand it. Thanks again. Zaereth ( talk) 19:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
The Geology Barnstar | ||
Thanks for setting me on the right track with the Alps. I couldn't have done it without expert advice. Truthkeeper ( talk) 01:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC) |
Hello, I noticed some of your input on articles even though good material, didn't have sources. I'll remind you of this page: Wikipedia:List of free online resources. This makes it easier too MediaWiki:Gadget-ProveIt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sidelight12 ( talk • contribs) 05:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
That's the closet I could find. Sidelight12 ( talk) 06:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
My mistake. I got mixed up with the editors. Sidelight12 ( talk) 18:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
If you have some spare energy, please come and lend a hand. Thanks! — hike395 ( talk) 17:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
user talk:Edit Centric#Hantavirus Risk in Yosemite
This person (blocked sockmaster Thmc1) is still block evading by not logging in, even after he was warned by SysAdmin Kudpung. I would suggest that you block the suspected IPs(173.63176.93, 74.88.160.244) as well as IPs used by his other blocked account (Nyc88) and any other accounts affiliated w/them. Why are sockppuppets of a blocked sockmaster still allowed to edit even after ample warnings? To make matters worse, he even violated his block and continuted editing the day after he was blocked! Please see Thmc1 sockpuppet investigation archive for latest investigation/evidence [8]. MBaxter1 ( talk) 18:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
I think that this Yosemite hantavirus story is worthy of at least brief mention in the article because it is now having international implications. I just don't see a justification in ignoring it completely, thanks. 173.63.176.93 ( talk) 20:56, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi vsmith, You recently removed my edits from a few chemistry related terms in which I added links to the External Link sections. I thought it would be useful to have a more simplified version of these definitions, which is what the external links offered. It wasn't to dictionary.com as mentioned. Just wanted to clarify it wasn't spam, again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themaab ( talk • contribs) 19:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
re: Smoke Creek Desert, Nevada =- thanks for some of the clean up - I'll try to find the cites, they disappeared when I decided it was faster to compose in word than on the page and then copy and paste - some cites took and some didn't - eg: the ECV (E. Clampus Vitus) maps they put together - I'll try to find those - but the picture has me confused - the credit says 'Denver, co' - then the smoke creek - it looks like it might be the smoke creek - though the edge of the basin is FAR more telling as it is a 'charged' basin -- unlike the others - Winnemucca Lake (Lake Winnemucca) and the Black Rock Desert -which are charge-discharge basins. The tracks of vehicles and their detritus give ample warning of the nature of that particular basin. -- could you clarify the origin of the photo- having done a fair amount of work out there, that photo would have had to have been shot from the basin itself - unlikely except in late August/early September if I recall correctly.
Yeah, I was Navy Independent Duty Corpsman (entered at E-5 because I had all but one semester of college to do in a double Micro/Etomoloty major and turned down their OCS offer since I was headed for CO anyway and left USN as a E-8 without TIR but it didn't matter as I was mustered out w/o record to work for Nixon (who 'stopped' bio warfare) through different pay checks each month. I was forced to do 5 (as in FIVE!) back-to-back tours many of which were with the 2/5th and 3/5th Marines then the 2/5th and then a VERY short stint with the 3/4th(?) - but worked all regions from I through IV since I was 'unattached' to The Corps -- and 5 years is a LONG time to spend in cournty. Yes-- what a long strange trips it's been. My last tour was too weird - But the trade off was we'll give you a choice - no combat, no military record (eg no VA), and we'll let you do bio-research (mass distraction use of bacteria, rot cotton) and give you a Masters when you go back to the real world. I guess that's here had to tell what's real after a bit. But I LOVE the desert because you can see things coming a LONG way away. Then I earned multiple MS/A's and ended up with an Ed.D. in Special Ed, and am now retired.
Anyway I went to check on Smoke Creek after the Burners finished another season destroying The Black Rock and some of the most fragile environment in the world, and despoiling the Holy and Sacred sties of the Pyramid Band of the Paiute, and the Western Shoshone and wanted to see if anyone had picked up on the dead-end references that were hanging fire waiting for someone to catch-- which means a few hours tracking down maps for cites. thanks for pushing me - no need to contact me, I'll have it done in the next month or so, depending on how tired I get of dial-up speeds - live rural and deal with both the good and the bad. thanks again my friend. I won't be back here to get an answer, but will try to find those maps, they are not as buried as Freemont's maps were but FAR more easy to find than the rail-road maps themselves! - Pgalioni ( talk) 21:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC) "thank you for your service" LOL! ---
Thanks for doing that, I was hoping to get some sort of response from the editor, but you saved me from tagging it - the end result would have been the same. Mikenorton ( talk) 23:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, FYI I think he's on right now 97.86.80.98 ( talk · contribs) NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 19:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
FYI, I asked James to tell the server that sock has restarted the block clocks. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 12:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
This User:Mrt3366 is reverting the edits, inserting pov templates, and putting <···!> in the article to hide text, of Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir, when asked on the talk page of the article he uses harsh words. My request is kindly take a look on the history, talk page and article and act accordingly so that the encyclopaedic values of the article are not lost. Thank you sir. MehrajMir ' (Talk) 11:57, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I have reverted your unacceptable removal of the see also link to a documentary that is directly related to the lake. Placing the relevant link is not "promotion of a film", your removal of it however reeks of something considerably less than encyclopedically acceptable. -- 87.79.208.194 ( talk) 12:18, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith, Bedrock Geology UK North is back I'm afraid. Mikenorton ( talk) 16:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I don't often ask these things (in fact this is a first), but there sometimes come times in which I cannot contain my disdain of a certain class of administrator-- in this case several who are looking out for a buddy who is a music afficionado or musician, who nevertheless feels the lay need to edit articles on the philosophy of medicine. [10]. This is going to inevitably escalate to a civility block (simply because users get blocked when insulting admins). Would you consider showing up as an admin on my "side"? S B H arris 02:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi VSmith, there's an ongoing problem happening on the Authoritarianism article. Currently the user Zeraful and Cresix have been reverting all 3 of my edits on that article, for reasons that are not sufficiently justifiable and are totally senseless. The user Zeraful deleted some content critical of the Vietnamese gov't, like of how Hanoi blocked Facebook, how Vietnam is on the Reporters Without Borders "Enemies of the Internet" blacklist and how the Vietnamese government suppresses protests in the country like in 2011, in a paragraph in the article that are true and had proper and sufficient citations with sources to credible international news website articleslike Forbes and The Economist. Then, an ip user tried to reinstate those deleted items and added additional content. That ip's edits were reverted by Crecix (who used twinkle) with no reason provided. After that, after seeing what's going on in the article, I came in and reinstated the article version of that ip user, after checking the changes in content, and I saw nothing wrong with the change in content by that ip and nothing wrong with the sources they provided. I added an additional source to one of the deleted items as well, from the DART Center website from Columbia University. Then, my edits were reverted by Zeraful and Crecix, claiming that "sources are needed to back [the deleted content] up", and "verification of sources failed", even though the items in dispute do have sufficient and credible sources (you can check the sources for yourself as well). Can you please help in trying to resolve this issue? I would greatly appreciate your efforts in trying to find a resolution to this. As well on a side note, the user Zeraful has a chronic problem of blanking out content, that are factual and recognized by academics, that usually have sources to back them up, that are critical or exposing anything negative of the Vietnamese communist govt, and has done this in numerous articles in the past, like on the North Vietnam article, and imparting pro-communist POV statements in encyclopeadic articles, with no or invalid and unacceptable sources. Zeraful also engages in "wording wars", trying to change words used in articles to make articles sound less critical of the Vietnamese regime, often changing things to the point that sentences are grammatically incorrect. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 06:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
As of now, i'm not going to continue editing this article until mediation begins. I have just remembered 3rr, and i'm not going to let that Zeraful drive me over that. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 06:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Addressing zeraful's claims: removal of factual content, especially sourced ones, out of dislike or not wanting others to see it, IS censorship. Zeraful accuses me of POV, but really the info and content I contribute are true, factual, and usually sourced and supported content, with sources from reputable sources, which can be found in the North Vietnam article, the Authoritarianism article, and many others. The sources that Zeraful presents, like from vietnamnet.vn and tuoitre.vn, are on articles irrelevant to the content that he claims to support (I read the article for myself and know this, Zeraful hopes that no one on English wiki can read Vietnamese by sourcing to irrelevant Vietnamese-language webpages). Zeraful regularly imparts pro-communist commentary, not encyclopedic type material (more for blogs instead) in articles like the North Vietnam article and Battle of Khe Sanh article and many others (esp. look at those articles' talk pages), and very often Zeraful's content is very historically incorrect (look at the North Vietnam article talk page for yourself). Zeraful also engaged in personal attacks, telling me to "go get a life" in his edit summary on the Authoritarianism article, for example, and is very dishonest, like saying that I deleted sources from the BBC or Alexa, even though I clearly didn't and is still there in my reinstations, and like saying that he didn't delete content in the North Vetnam article when he clearly did. Zeraful also doesn't engage in developing compromised edits and solutions, like in the Authoritarianism and North Vietnam article, where he kept reverting my edits, and i'm the only one who delivered a compromised edit, in both articles. I also know that Zeraful is following and tracking my edits, which is very concerning. Nguyen1310 ( talk) 07:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
This user often add section without sources, and label other users as "communist censorship", like in http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=North_Vietnam&action=history. He is also changing word and content of the article to fit his own point of view, and when I present sources, he claim that they're "partisan" and deleted it, even if one of them come from BBC, and one from Alexa.-- Zeraful ( talk) 07:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you recently deleted the gallery at Chrysocolla. I thought it served a useful purpose, as Commons currently has 374 (!) photos of chrysocolla, to pick out a small subset to help our users visualize some of the varieties -- and the beauty -- of this mineral. Could you take another look at the gallery? Thanks, Pete Tillman ( talk) 03:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
I have noticed that you deleted the page "Bedrock Geology UK - Archaean and Palaeoproterozoic" by Rhondeag on the ground of Implausible typos (R3). I am a colleague of Rhondeag and we were wondering how this page warranted deletion under R3. Please could you provide us wih your reasons for deleting the page under R3. This would be much appreciated.
Pmc08 ( talk) 08:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Parenthetical referencing. Hyacinth ( talk) 23:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello. I don't think the ghost towns link is spam. The guy is not selling anything and nothing on his site links to any seller. Other than a page that says who he is, the site is not a personal web page. With these factors in mind, the site is not WP:ELNO. Your thoughts? (I'll look for them here.) -- S. Rich ( talk) 03:00, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Can you please take a look at this IP? They've been edit warring and vandalizing. Thanks. INever Cry 01:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for pulling you into this mess I seem to have made. INever Cry 01:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Dear Dr. Vsmith!
I am geologist with backgraund from 1973 (I worked as a little specialist when was a student of MSU in some "wild" territories ).
https://plus.google.com/113608956654143996274/about
If You can know anything about SALARS - You can look site of USGS.
If You have any gadgat in Your pocket - You have some piece Lithium. This metal is the base of modern batteries, accumulaters and etc. SALARS - the first source of Lithium. And KCl - one of the main fertilizers, and many potashes, and very many useful things.
So, I think, that WIKI readers have any rights to know, what is the base of the phones, electricity cars ann many other interesting things.
Regards,
aleksey g.repin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksey g.repin ( talk • contribs) 08:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
All right, I added scientific sources for opal and Neolithic usage. I will try to add sources to the uniqueness of Polish striped flint, if it indeed is so unique. I based on the internet sources claiming it is unique for Poland, however now I see, some forms of striped flint can be found in many places around the world. Please, give me a week. Olaf ( talk) 10:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Can you please block this IP, another one of blocked user Zrdragon's many sockpuppets? Thanks, TheTimesAreAChanging ( talk) 23:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi VSmith, i have a question regarding Pacific vs. Atlantic Ocean seafood. I know this is random and user pages are for article-related thingys, but it's a burning curiosity in me. Throughout my life, I ate seafood caught from the Pacific Ocean and from it's connecting water bodies, like sardines, mackerel, shrimp and other shellfish, salmon etc from Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan etc., and the seafood i ate from these areas had a typical (smelly) seafood smell/odor, although it wasn't very pungent. However, when I compared the same seafood i ate originating from the Pacific with the same ones originally caught from the Atlantic, e.g. from eastern North America, north Europe, the Atlantic seafood had a much more strong, very pronounced, seafood odor/smell. For example, frozen and canned sardines from Thailand and Vietnam had a much less pungent seafood odor than the same canned and frozen sardines from New Brunswick, Canada and Portugal. Why is this the case?? Nguyen1310 ( talk) 01:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I have the exact reference to VI Arnold, and the illustration, however (as it appeared) on another computer, so it might day a day or two to transfer the files. Sinc. Leon00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.24.130 ( talk) 12:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Hey there, V Smith.
I found and added your recommended citations. Reference #4 was intended for the whole section but have clarified. My intention was not to confuse. Also thank you - if you are the user that added the nifty mouse-overs to the citations. That was next on the list. Will hopefully have time to add more points of interest soon.
Cheers Victoriasays ( talk) 23:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Dude, it was an accident. I was in the process of figuring out to restore it.
Victoriasays (
talk) 02:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello - the IP at the following: User talk:68.188.38.198 is at a school (and I am a teacher here.) Is there a way you can permanently or at least semi-permanently block it? This way the students here won't be able to edit without a login. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.38.198 ( talk) 14:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, there's a subsection that somebody has added to the mélange geology article covering a band. It's entirely out-of-place, could you please revert the article? Thanks, Colin J. (NZ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.23.26 ( talk) 06:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you deleted a list of students that was placed on the page years ago. May I ask why? thanks, BigDogRufus — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigDogRufus ( talk • contribs) 19:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, what happened now at these articles: Mount Hermon, List of mountains, List of caves, Gush Hispin, National parks and nature reserves of Israel, Mishor Adumim, Tourism in Israel, and all the East Jerusalem settlements attacked by this IP on 31 October here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/80.179.118.129
is a coordinated sock attack, this has happened before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive733#Coordinated_attacks_by_socks
Its basically many different IPs and "new" accounts going back to different places showing up at the exact same time and starting to pov push and edit war.
This IP: [11] for example is a confirmed proxy server: http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/67.142.164.21
I kindly ask that you please revert all these edits and lock the articles. -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 02:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for straightening me out on a sales link at Old Faithful Inn. I wasn't trying to be crassly commercial but I think it's useful for readers to have some pathway to finding the source. With printed books, that's not hard. But with ebooks, what to do? The link I added is for a book available only on the iTunes store; nowhere else. For some reason, a google search for the isbn doesn't find it, which might be an issue to take up with the iTunes store.
For that matter, Wiki's isbn search page book sources lacks a link for the iTunes store among the other booksellers. Would that be the right place on Wiki to create a pathway?
I value guidance. Meanwhile, I'll go back to the sandbox for more practice.
tks — Preceding unsigned comment added by BluffTaylor ( talk • contribs) 04:10, 2 November 2012
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is " Global warming controversy". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!
EarwigBot operator / talk 00:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC) Hello, I'm Cole132132. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! The reason for this being the refernces were directly stated for co2 gaps as well as tempertature changes a compleatly relavent subject. I suggest instead of blatently delting other peoples work because of your own political opinions (which is the only thing assumable) that you overlook things properly, as well as participate in the Dispute Noticeboad.-- Cole132132 ( talk) 01:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC) Hello, Vsmith. You have new messages at
Plurofuturo's talk page.
Message added 09:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. I think I've cleared things up - they explained the apparent COI (and it looks like it's not one), and they're now in compliance with WP:NOSHARE. Thanks for calling them on that. — Francophonie&Androphilie ( Je vous invite à me parler) 09:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
I added the "MRS GREN" section to the Life article because a new user had created a new article of that title with no sources at all, and with the simple definition. Rather than leave such a poor article in place, I created a section at the Life article for this new article to redirect to. Based on the number of hits the phrase receives on Google, it seems a likely search term, especially for younger Wikipedia readers. The sources I gave are reliable in that they show that the term is a commonly used acronym used in elementary pedagogy, which was the point of the references. I would hardly go to those sources to learn meaningful science, but sources that might otherwise be considered unreliable can be considered reliable in the right context. Would you prefer the information sourced from the BBC? Or from an Australian climate change website? Or from TES, a British teachers' network? WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 14:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one. JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swallingwikimedia.org) with...
The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist. Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC) I noticed you recently made an edit to the Jurassic article. Those paleo maps existed for such a long time in all those articles and now all of a sudden they were removed? What happened? Did they suddenly become non-fair use? Those images fit so great in all the period articles, it would be a shame if they were all taken out :( I'm wondering if you know what happened to them. Cadiomals ( talk) 04:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Protection barely expired on Michael Crichton and we've already been hit with two IPs repeating the edit warring that caused it in the first place. We made need permanent protection. Glaucus ( talk) 16:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
|
Take it to the article talk page |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
hello, could you please not delete my edit? If you feel its not neutral or its promotional kindly edit it to be neutral. I personally don't see it this way, on the page of every approved medicine by the fda there is a mention of the name of the company which developed it. See for example prozac or tadalafil. This gel isn't alternative medicine, it is a mainstream drug, just as any other drug. It can be prescribed by normal doctors. Its fda approved. 70.39.186.229 ( talk) 08:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)ryanspir
FDA is an independent source. It's not FDA "letters". It's FDA official approval. I'm Ryanspir and I'm not a part of that company and has nothing to do with colloidal silver. I just want the information provided on this page to be unbiased and updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 15:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC) PromotionHello, I'm not promoting commercial product. I didn't write for example that it cures all or anything. 1. I think you are mistaken. Any FDA approved drug may and should have info about it on wikipedia. Please look prozac or cialis articles for example. They do contain info about the manufacturer. I don't see any reason why FDA approved drugs containing colloidal silver product should be treated differently. I did provide a link to their website, because meanwhile this company has no entry in wikipedia. However, once the entry will be created I'll change the link. 2. "Silver is also promoted within alternative medicine in the form of colloidal silver, although it has not been shown to be safe or effective.[1]" This is what is written in the lead. This became absolutely false and misleading all the readers from the year of 2009 when FDA approved this form of colloidal silver. *It is a regular drug now, which can and is prescribed by the doctor. Do you agree with me? Because the fact of FDA approval makes it impossible to consider this variant of colloidal silver as not safe or as not effective. Are we together? 3. The whole article about colloidal silver is written in very bad, biased and in negative way. Why wouldn't you fix that? Looking at the talk page it's not only me who holds this opinion. Its currently written in a way, that shows that colloidal silver is mainly quackery and it may turn you blue and create side-effects. Did you ever hear that FDA will approve quackery drugs? Did you ever hear that EPA will approve quackery agents and allow them to be used by hospitals in the US? This article should be edited in the light of FDA approval of colloidal silver in 2009. We know also that FDA is not a fan of approving colloidal silver, it took years for it to be approved. So we can easily deduct that the company have provided enough scientific evidence to FDA supporting it's claims. 4. I have just listed the facts in my edit and I was very brief. Saying for example that this is the first colloidal silver approved by FDA is not a promotion, it's a fact. Listing of the patents, besides including additional info for the interested user also shows that silver sol is a variation of colloidal silver. 5. "In August 1999, the FDA banned colloidal silver sellers from claiming any therapeutic or preventive value for the product..". As you see, HERE you are satisfied that if FDA said so, no additional independent sources are needed in order to state that fact on wikipedia. So, in 2009 FDA has reversed it's position by granting its approval. It's obvious that the cited information is wrong now and outdated from 2009 and till this moment. 6. Etc, etc, etc. There is so many things that are currently wrong in the article and I can talk for ages. So I was a bit shocked that you have reversed my edit which contains updated factual information while at the same time you do allow all the wrong and well outdated info to stay on the page. Most of the cited negative publications were written well prior to 2009. But the medical community is advancing, new forms of colloidal silvers being developed which wikipedia should reflect.
If you would like me anything to change or add, please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 15:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Colloidal silver nonsenseHaha :-). I caught you red handed. When you say colloidal silver nonsense it shows that you are personally biased regarding the subject. As a result of this the article contains wrong info and doesn't contain the right info. I suggest you inhibit yourself from watchlisting this article. Alternatively, lets elevate it further. The link i provided is not fda memo. Its the official fda approval. Any drug as long as its fda approved has the right to be listed as a drug on the wikipedia, it doesn't matter if its for internal or external use. Interestingly enough, when it was said previously that fda warns about using cs, now that was simple a letter and yet you allowed this statement to exist on the page. You are using double standards. :) also, about us patent, do you think they have no verification process? Anyone can create a snake oil for treating humans and they will issue a patent for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.173 ( talk) 18:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Bias and double standartsi'm sure that if i would add additional warnings around the sections and cite fda letters or memos, you wouldn't object. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.209 ( talk) 19:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC) To talkstalkerHaha :). The link you have provided is for international patents and indeed it mentions some hits for perpetual motion. However same search on US Patent site didn't show any hits. Probably some countries have less stringent rules for inclusion. So sorry, but even on this side point no win :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.173 ( talk) 22:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Wp:medrsi hope i'm signed now. Lets look at subject. It says: statements from nation or internation recognized expert bodies. So, will you contradict that fda is such a body? Or you contradict the fact that the link which i provided clearly allows the company to distribute the cs gel in us and it also specifies the indications as it is done by fda for any drug? Isn't that link even if it would be a memo or a letter doesn't show the position of fda regarding the product? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 22:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Patents for talk stalkerhehe :). I cannot see any approved patent for perpetual motion. It seems that the link you provided also lists simply submitted and not approved patents. :) i'm still winning on this point unless you can provide seven digit number for an approved us patent for perpetual motion in the last ten years. :) 70.39.186.237 ( talk) 08:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Ryanspir Please read thishttp://lifesilver.com/testimony.htm This link contains u.S congressional report about silver sol. As they state a copy of this can be found at library of congress. An additional resource is http://silversol.soundconcepts.com/faqs.aspx as of special interest for you read statement of surgeon general of us airforce pk carlton md who recommends it being used in military and the protection of the civilians. Sorry cannot sign, some issue in my mobile phone, ryanspir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
|
Neutral opinions
Please read this Washington Post opinion:
A good deal for the District and Puerto Rico
Please read The New York Times Opinion:
Will Puerto Rico Be America’s 51st State?
Please read the Boston Herald Opinion:
Puerto Rican statehood By Boston Herald Editorial Staff — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.82.115 ( talk) 01:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
So can you put back my edit? In Wp:medrs it says OR, not and. Thus fda position statement shall suffice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.144.184.146 ( talk) 07:07, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Could you please put back my edit regarding section Silver Sol which you have removed? This is in light of the additional explanation and the correct adherence of my edit to wp:medrs. A quote from WP:MEDRS - "Ideal sources for biomedical material include general or systematic reviews in reliable, third-party, published sources, such as reputable medical journals, widely recognised standard textbooks written by experts in a field, or medical guidelines and position statements from nationally or internationally recognised expert bodies." Please see "or" before the word medical, which means position statements from nationally or internationally recognized expert bodies is sufficient. The link to FDA approval letter for ASAP silver sol gel is the position statetemnt of FDA, which is a recognized expert body. That letter says that FDA recognizes it as an official drug and allows it's sell in the country and use/prescription.
1 - This is a database of FDA clearances. Kindly seach entry: DEVICE: ASAP ANTIMICROBIAL SILVER WOUND DRESSING GEL.
In addition: [www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf8/K082333.pdf Quote:] "We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce.." Please reflect upon: "..have determined the device is substantially equivalent.."
Ryanspir ( talk) 13:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)ryanspir
Dear Vsmith,
Dougweller wrote to me, that it is not possible to insert a link to a publication without owning the copy-right, because this would be a copyright-violation. So if you delete links inserted by the copyrightholders themselves calling it self-publication, you cannot insert any links at all. Then all articles you referred to in the "Notes" are eiter self-publications or copyright-violations, and there are many links to various scientific artiles on your pages.
Yours sincerely - Geomensch
You dont want only outdated historical literature on Wikipedia, do you? Kind regards - Geomensch
Geomensch ( talk) 08:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Dear Vsmith,
DougWeller wrote to me, that he thought the linking to the PDF supposively was a copyright violation and therefore he removed it from the Wikipedi page. He asked me, if I have the copyright or not and he gave me a warning because of an assumed copyright-violation, that did not happen as we now know. The link was inserted again and he accepted. No reason for deletion exists.
Please read the impressum on page 1: All rights reserved to the author. Although to book can be bought from Amazon and from many other book-stores, I keep the right to give it as PDF as free contribution to the geoscientists. The editor Books on Demand did not get the copyright for it. This is unusual, I know. But Books on Demand allows the authors to keep all the rights and then publish the work with another editor. I can give this to a scientific journal and then I will give the copyright to them. As long as I don't do this, I can improve the content by the feed-back of all my colleagues all over the world. As it has an ISBN, I can show it to anyone without any danger of plagiarism. This is, what I did for some time and know the work is complete.
There is no conflict of interest because Amazon does NOT have any right to be the only one to sell the book. There are other book-stores who sell it as well. Everyone can make his own price. They can sell it cheeper or more expensive or give it for free if they want to. The only person, who has rights is me. I can make this available as a gift without violating any rights of any other person because they don't have them. Only after giving it to a journal, the copyright belongs to the journal.
Now my question to you: Were all the articles linked to on Wikipedia linked by the editors of these journals themselves as copyright-owners? Who did it? Anyone can do this, if the article can be read for free and the journal does not take a fee. Some articles cost a fee. For others free access is provided. This is the decision of the copyright-owner alone.
"We don't use Wikipedia to promote our own stuff". Whose "stuff" should it be? What will you do, when someone else inserts a link to my article? The question is not, to whom something belongs, but if the scientific quality is good. This is the most and only important criteria. If the Bibliography on the Wikipedia-page about Earth Expansion is considered a "collection of crazy ideas" anyways, then Wikipedia can very well add another new crazy idea to it. Beleive me, there are much more worthy places for this link than here.
My new publication has been read by so many thousands of scientists already. It is going all over the world and taken notice of with high appreciation, as I was able to end the conflict between crazy earth-expansion theories and today's knowledge about plate tectonics. I have had heavy scientific discussions with expansionists teaching things completely out of scope, as I wrote in the book. The historical importance of this work is a very good reason to add it to the Wikipedia-Bibliography. Even about a probably outdated theory the list of literature should not be outdated. In the first place it should be complete.
Kind regards - Geomensch Geomensch ( talk) 08:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
This warning comes routinely from the upload area for every document, because the upload area cannot take the responsibility for the downloads. If you answer "yes" that you want to do the download, everything will be okay. If this warning appears in big red letters for other users, this might be irritating and must be changed. So what would you suggest?
Geomensch ( talk) 15:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Kindly reply on the talk page of the medical uses of silver regarding medrs. Ryanspir ( talk) 04:46, 30 November 2012 (UTC)Ryanspir
kindly reply on medical uses of silver talk page Ryanspir ( talk) 18:19, 3 December 2012 (UTC)ryanspir
Hello, I just saw you blocked User:208.108.129.140 from editing - thanks. Would you mind dropping an appropriate template on their Talk page? This would indicate that this IP no longer needs to be reported to admins. Thanks. kashmiri 00:55, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
This is how reliable peer-reviews are :-DDD
Earth Formation ( talk) 16:10, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith,
I wanted to wish you a Merry Christmas. Your name pops up frequently on my watchlist and, although I haven't really interacted with you much, the few conversations we've had have been quite pleasant. Thanks for that, and for all your work at stopping vandals. I hope the coming year is a great one for you. Zaereth ( talk) 02:15, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Quacod ( talk • contribs) 11:20, 23 December 2012
You were talking to a sock there. Dougweller ( talk) 15:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Vsmith! I was wondering if you have time to take another look at meteoric iron and assess if it is already B-class or what it still needs to reach it. -- Tobias1984 ( talk) 16:42, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey Vsmith! Me again ;). I was wondering if you would like to take a look at keilite. You were so helpful with daubréelite, so I thought you might be interested in this one (although i see that you already visited the page once). -- Tobias1984 ( talk) 17:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thumb|Beetle in Pine AZ Back in August 2011, you removed this photo from the Pine, AZ article. I keep meaning to write you to ask if you would reconsider. I think it's a pretty cool shot, and Pine isn't an over-illustrated article. Only gas station in Pine, ims. Best, Pete Tillman ( talk) 20:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)