User talk:Double sharp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for 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 Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original talk page is located at

I know that the following users watch my talk page, so I will not use {{talkback}} on them. If you watch my talk page, feel free to add yourself to this list.

Whoo yeaah![edit]

That's awesome Neptunium passed its GA! Thanks for all the work you put into it and for dealing with the nomination process. I'm sorry I haven't been on lately, I've been crazy busy in real life and it looks like it's probably going to be that way for a while unfortunately (like probably through at least the end of August, maybe longer; not really sure right now) But yeah, when things do calm down again, I'll definitely be up for doing some more element articles if you're not to busy then either. Thanks again for all your help and hard work with the article! Thingg 00:06, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! It wouldn't have passed without your help.
I think the next ones I'll do are flerovium, thorium, and iron, but they'll have to wait for some time. (Fl will definitely be first: I'm almost done, with one section not yet rewritten. Th and Fe will take a considerable amount of time.) Double sharp (talk) 04:50, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Period 1 element and the others[edit]

I noticed that you redirected articles on the Period elements. This includes Period 1, which is the lead article in Wikipedia:Featured topics/Period 1 elements. So before I take this topic for review, I want to know if there was a consensus to redirect these to Period (periodic table). I don't want it to be that the redirects were unjust or anything. GamerPro64 18:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

See WT:ELEM#Notability of as yet unsynthesized superactinides, where I explained the rationale. Kwamikagami agreed (and in fact proposed this earlier, but didn't carry it out for period 1 because it was a GA), and after some discussion DePiep appears to support this decision. Double sharp (talk) 05:18, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, we can understand that as a consensus. About featured topic: as Double sharp remarked, the article was low in quality. It did not actually describe the period, it was listing two individuals. Therefor, the article was of ow quality, and likely too low to fit the Wikipedia:Featured topics standard. -DePiep (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
And also, it seemed very unlikely to me that it could ever describe the period instead of two individuals, because H is certainly the most oddball element on the periodic table, and there's not much to talk about periodic trends if there are only 2 elements. (For the periods further down, the trends are either largely the same or are distinct enough in various sections that they should go to their own articles, e.g. transition metal, lanthanide, actinide.) Double sharp (talk) 11:51, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Key for the Featured topics nomination status seems to be the GA status of the article (now a redirect). That could have been reduced some steps with reason as described now, and so pull the FT ground (it just happened to join two FA's). Wikipedia:Featured topics/Noble gases, the other FT in this area, looks better suited. -DePiep (talk) 12:14, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't quite understand. Could you rephrase that, please? Double sharp (talk) 12:26, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Period 1 element was the naming/lead article for Wikipedia:Featured topics/Period 1 elements. The whole set was three articles together (with H and He). A requirement for FT is that all articles are GA/FA (Wikipedia:Featured topics criteria). OK so far.

But we saw (you pointed out) that the content of Period 1 element page was not that substantial. More of a bad listing. So for that reason alone, we could have pulled the GA status from that page. And without GA, the page looses its right to form a FT, and this FT would have ceased to be. Had we done that route, the FT status would not have helped the page either (keeping it in existence). Simply, I doubt that its FA status was deserved. -DePiep (talk) 17:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Well with all this in mind, I started an FTRC for the topic. It can be found here if anyone is willing to participate. GamerPro64 19:01, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alkali metal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Krause. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Double sharp (talk) 12:28, 22 July 2014 (UTC)