|This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at
Vandals and Spam
- 1 ITN for Gliese 581 e
- 2 Your exoplanet radius charts
- 3 Re: COROT or CoRoT
- 4 Babylon 5 Centauri not from Alpha Centauri
- 5 Renaming request
- 6 Planet radius of unknown size.
- 7 Extrasolar planet
- 8 Dreugol system
- 9 Fair use rationale for File:BGG-FrontPage-2006-07.jpg
- 10 You are now a Reviewer
- 11 Aldaron - Let's discuss
- 12 Come join us
- 13 Looking for Wikipedia Ambassadors
- 14 Kepler-10b
- 15 DYK for Kepler-10b
- 16 Kepler infoboxes
- 17 Lincoln Memorial section
- 18 Solar flare
- 19 Images of Murasaki Shikibu Diary Emaki
- 20 Changes to ribbons
- 21 Barnstar
- 22 File:Exoplanet Discovery Methods Bar.svg
- 23 User:Aldaron/German-style Gamer
- 24 inductive reasoning vs. scientific reasoning
- 25 thank you
ITN for Gliese 581 e
Your exoplanet radius charts
Just to let you know I've started a discussion of your radius charts here. I suspect they may constitute original research and in some cases may be misleading. Icalanise (talk) 22:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Re: COROT or CoRoT
There probably is a good case for moving the planet/star articles to CoRoT because the scientific literature appears to be fairly consistent in this usage. For the satellite itself it is less clear, certainly the various mission websites and press releases are quite inconsistent. You're also up against people claiming that the Manual of Style tells us to avoid odd capitalisation schemes, whether it actually does or doesn't may or may not be another matter. Presumably we should be consistent whatever the decision. As you can see the idea of using CoRoT was shot down when I tried to move it before. Icalanise (talk) 21:43, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with your thinking: the satellite and mission can stay COROT (there's enough inconsistency in the literature), but the planet and star articles should move to CoRoT (the relevant literature is quite consistent). I don't think those who would argue that Manual of Style has anything to say against this have a leg to stand on. — Aldaron • T/C 22:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Babylon 5 Centauri not from Alpha Centauri
Hi, you made an edit to the Alpha Centauri page asking for a source on the changes I made. Later in the paragraph, I listed two possible explanations for the confusion, one with an external source, the other that was mentioned elsewhere in wikipedia but for which I could not find a source. I'm new to editing so wondering if I could have structured this better when providing the one source I could find? MikeBz (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- Confirmed. — Aldaron • T/C 15:13, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Planet radius of unknown size.
- I like that idea. Next time I update I'll experiment with it. — Aldaron • T/C 00:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Would you like to look at Dreugol system on NukeVac Wiki that NuclearVacuum made? You can even participate discussion about the article. First you have to create your account in order for you to have discussion. BlueEarth (talk | contribs) 13:43, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for File:BGG-FrontPage-2006-07.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:BGG-FrontPage-2006-07.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
Aldaron - Let's discuss
Come join us
in a Discussion re Invention.
- You can state there your comments.
- If you accept my contribution - you don't make me a favor, it's for article's sake.
- If you don't like it - you can amend my contribution as you like - the article is yours also.
Looking for Wikipedia Ambassadors
Hi! I'm leaving you this message because you are listed as a Wikipedian associated with Harvard. The Wikipedia Ambassador Program is currently looking for Campus Ambassadors to help with Wikipedia assignments at schools in Boston and Cambridge (including Harvard), which will be participating in the Public Policy Initiative for the Spring 2011 semester. The role of Campus Ambassadors will be to provide face-to-face training and support for students on Wikipedia-related skills (how to edit articles, how to add references, etc.). This includes doing in-class presentations, running workshops and labs, possibly holding office hours, and in general providing in-person mentorship for students.
Prior Wikipedia skills are not required for the role, as training will be provided for all Campus Ambassadors (although, of course, being an experienced editor is a plus).
If you live near Boston and you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador, or know someone else from the area who might be, please email me or leave a message on my talk page.
If you're an experienced and active Wikipedian, you might be interested alternatively in becoming an Online Ambassador. The role of Online Ambassadors is to serve as mentors for students; it doesn't require any in-person outreach. Take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!
You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).
--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 21:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Kepler-10b
|On 18 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kepler-10b, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Kepler-10b is the first definitively confirmed rocky exoplanet? 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.|
I saw you made the pages for a lot of the Kepler discoveries. I was wondering if you could help me set up a few exoplanet ones that are redirects at the moment. Are you up to it? --Starstriker7(Talk) 05:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Lincoln Memorial section
We are currently attempting to bring the Abraham Lincoln article to FA status and are trying to establish consensus regarding images. Your consensus and opinion is needed on the Abraham Lincoln talk page. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Hallo, as one of the major contributors of the article Solar flare I thought to write you. I'd like to have your opinion on this discussion. thanks in advance! --Dia^ (talk) 12:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Images of Murasaki Shikibu Diary Emaki
Hi! I'd be very happy if you could help with this request. Particularly with the image which will soon be on wikipedia's mainpage as DYK. Thanks. bamse (talk) 09:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Changes to ribbons
You might like to know that a discussion regarding changes you recently reverted in File:Journeyman Editor Ribbon.png, File:Yeoman Editor Ribbon.png and File:Experienced and Established Editor.png is taking place at Wikipedia talk:Service awards#ribbons. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 21:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
|The Original Barnstar|
|This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.|
Hi there! Is there any chance this image could be updated to cover the rest of 2012? A reader has asked via our ticketing system if this is possible. Thanks! — Joseph Fox 00:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I hope to soon. A (now not so) recent update of the tool I use to make the my figures introduced quite a few bugs, and I'm struggling to fix them. — Aldaron • T/C 00:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
inductive reasoning vs. scientific reasoning
Hi Aldaron, I came across this edit and was wondering what you mean by "scientific reasoning". Is there an article that describes the distinction you're making, and the sense in which the two are often confused? Scientific reasoning redirects to Models of scientific inquiry which mentions that both deduction and induction are used in science. Is that what you mean, that they're different in that induction is part of scientific reasoning but not the whole? --Allen (talk) 17:18, 3 October 2013 (UTC)