User talk:SkoreKeep

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

Welcome!

Hello, SkoreKeep, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Tuvas 14:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Of Course:-)[edit]

I can see your new to Wikipedia, but any bit of useful information is, well, useful. Feel free to post as much as you can get about the Vikings probes. If your not as good writing such documents, feel free then to add what you can, post in talk pages, etc, and people will help format your text to be somewhat better. Welcome to Wikipedia! Tuvas 14:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Carbon dioxide[edit]

Information.svg Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Carbon dioxide, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- TS 16:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

October 2013[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Subash.chandran007. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Operation Sunbeam, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. -SubashChandran007 ׀ sign! 00:43, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, SkoreKeep. You have new messages at WP:MCQ.
Message added 10:45, 31 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ww2censor (talk) 10:45, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Another reply and moved your post back up to the original discussion to keep it all together, so anyone reading has a complete view. There was no need to start a new discussion section; just continue to same one. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 12:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC SkoreKeep/sandbox was accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
SkoreKeep/sandbox, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Northamerica1000(talk) 18:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Nuclear test tables[edit]

Hi!
I noticed your recently created articles on Soviet nuclear tests and went through them and fixed a few consistent typos (e.g. "Semiplatinsk" => "Semipalatinsk"). While doing so, I noticed that the table you're using could be improved a bit:

  • Put the table notes into a "note" group. This keeps them footnotes but distinguishes them from actual references.
  • Skip the "in Curies, with metric prefixes" bit in the venting notes. Units are given in the table, and it's always better to just add a conversion to SI.
  • "(and yes, they are all metric units)" feels a bit too informal for an encyclopedia. Something like "(all metric units)" should suffice.

I went ahead and implemented these changes in 1966 Soviet Nuclear Tests.
Cheers. Kolbasz (talk) 15:38, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Kolbasz. I've implemented your suggestions (and also corrected Semipalatinsk's misspell), and they should show up in the pages that haven't yet been done - I did 1967, -8, and -9 this afternoon. Regards, SkoreKeep (talk) 22:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
To SkoreKeep, for ensuring the quality of the article "Plutonium". Axl ¤ [Talk] 15:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join MILHIST[edit]

Welcome to MILHIST[edit]

Operation Sandstone[edit]

Nice additions to the article. If you could let me know where it is sourced from, that would be even better.

Also, I am still looking for reviewers for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Armed Forces Special Weapons Project/archive1.


Regards Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:34, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Atomic testing[edit]

Image Name Description
Barnstar-rutherfordatom.png The Atomic Barnstar The Atomic Barnstar is hereby presented to SkoreKeep for demonstrating a longterm commitment to accuracy and depth of coverage in the area of nuclear testing. Excellent work! Binksternet (talk) 20:05, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Operation Fishbowl[edit]

I noticed that you've added the Line Islands to Johnston Island as being involved in the Operation Fishbowl nuclear tests. I don't understand the rationale for adding the Line Islands. All of the launches were done from Johnston Island. There were ships and aircraft involved from many areas across the Pacific, but I don't remember ever reading of any unusually significant involvement from the Line Islands.

On a related matter, the "location" of nuclear tests in the new tables causes consistent confusion about rocket launched tests when the launch points are stated in words, followed immediately by the coordinates of the detonation, without further explanation. This was a significant problem in the Soviet K Project article, and it is still a bit of a problem in the Operation Fishbowl article. It would leave the impression that Johnston Island moved around a few hundred miles during 1962.

I believe that there were 25 Soviet nuclear tests launched by rocket, and I can think of 11 United States nuclear tests launched by rocket (and one by balloon). In all of these cases, the location is going to be different, sometimes substantially, between the launch and detonation points. X5dna (talk) 11:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hmmmmm. Somewhere I got the impression that Johnston Island was one of the Line Islands. Certainly have to fix that.
Fixed it. See Operation Dominic.
Yeah, I've been contemplating what to do about the rocket thing. The example that came first to mind was Swordfish, which was launched and exploded in open waters, 1200 miles apart. For the moment all I can say is that the lat/lon tags are always the explosions. I guess I've got to rethink how exactly the "wordy" descriptions happen, and what to do to make them work consistently, at least among rocket launches. I really need to highlight both the locations. Give me a few days to think on it, and I'll get back to the talk page for it.
Thanks for stirring up the bees here; I needed that!! SkoreKeep (talk) 11:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Fixed that. See Soviet Project K nuclear tests. SkoreKeep (talk) 05:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Using capitals on Wikipedia[edit]

Hi, and thanks for your work. Could you please read WP:MOSCAP and correct your use of capitals? Thanks a lot. --John (talk) 22:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed the "Explosions" thing this morning and changed my template. I noted your other changes to the Soviet K project, and am making those changes as well. The next updates I'll be doing are the Soviet series, starting with 1949-51, so check that one out later today and back me up on it, if you will. Crossroads is a special deal, what with the featured article designation, so you're having done that is good. I won't be able to get back around to all the US pages again for a week or so (I just finished sweeping them this morning), but they'll get updated for this in due course. Thanks for the help. SkoreKeep (talk) 23:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

.

Speedy deletion nomination of Nuclear testing: India, Pakistan and North Korea[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. PamD 00:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Not a problem. Had I known how to go about it, I'd have deleted it myself. It is just a meaningless title now, and the talk page can go with it - nothing there of any use. SkoreKeep (talk) 01:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Nuclear testing[edit]

Deleted. Had I known that you wanted it to be deleted, I would have deleted it yesterday. Nyttend (talk) 12:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Nuclear testing: proposed article moves[edit]

Hello SkoreKeep. I've opened a regular move discussion at Talk:Soviet Union's nuclear testing series. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:35, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:EASTEREGG.[edit]

Hi there,

Don't worry: The EasterEgg concept is pretty easy to get the hang of. Basically, a link to "X" should be called "X". If it's called "Y", when the user gets to that tab, they may ask "Where did this article 'Y' come from? I don't remember clicking a link to 'Y'". And of course, they didn't; they clicked a link to "X".

The purpose of piped links is generally to alter syntax to match the surrounding sentence structure; they're not for giving a link a different name from the attached article.

InternetMeme (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Draft[edit]

Hello SkoreKeep. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Subcritical nuclear tests".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Subcritical nuclear tests}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Precession of perihelion[edit]

Thank you for your interest in editing articles related to planets. Please consider removing the perihelion precession information from planet infoboxes. All six orbital elements have complicated variations in time, and there is no obvious reason for singling out the argument of pericenter. In addition, the variations are very small and are applicable only at the current epoch, so the numbers as currently listed are somewhat distracting and misleading. If you feel that the numbers must be listed somewhere, consider adding a table to the apsidal precession article. Thank you. JeanLucMargot (talk) 16:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

As you request. SkoreKeep (talk) 17:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Completed. SkoreKeep (talk) 17:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)