Please note - rules of the game! I usually answer comments & questions on this page rather than on your talk (unless initiated there) to keep the conversation thread together. I am aware that some wikiers do things differently so let me know if you expect a reply on your page and maybe it'll happen :-)
- 1 Archives
- 2 US Virgin Islands
- 3 Permian–Triassic extinction event
- 4 Welcome
- 5 Abiogenesis: arise or arose?
- 6 Sorry for Added the link
- 7 Microscopic derivation
- 8 External Link Question
- 9 Maya civilization
- 10 Re: Marcellettim addition removed
- 11 Bizarre edit summary
- 12 Per your message
- 13 Forum Needed on Wikipedia
- 14 Thank you for your Welcome and would appreciate your guidance
- 15 Oxyhydrogen ...
- 16 ISASMELT
- 17 Edit war
- 18 Sandbox category removal
- 19 Not sure
- 20 Copyright violation
- 21 External Links to GIA Gem Encyclopedia
- 22 A barnstar for you!
- 23 RevDel Request
- 24 Panspermia
- 25 GIA links
US Virgin Islands
Permian–Triassic extinction event
I have deleted "By contrast the CO2 ppm vs. pre-Industrial vs. todays" because this insinuates a hysterical and unproven hypothesis that todays global warming event has something to do with this event; or that the CO2 levels caused by this event may cause a similar event today. Though it is true the CO2 levels caused by this event increased 2000 ppm, it remained high throughout the Triassic, Jurassic and made a gradual decline beyond. Todays CO2 dispute has no business in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boomboyloots (talk • contribs) 08:14, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- Hmm... will think it over, meanwhile you might want to explain your edits at talk:Permian–Triassic extinction event rather than simply reverting. Vsmith (talk) 10:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your welcome ... I guess my edits didn't go un-noticed after all, ha ha.
Also am "retired" geologist (UWestern Ontario, '76). Am collecting current info (most of my mineralogical texts are out-of-date), but occasionally I see a misleading entry and will correct. Not used to the ins and outs as a contributor, but will learn. Am thinking of establishing a web site or Wiki regarding mineral separation data using specific gravity for those who mess round (like me) with a small concentrating table mill to pass the time.
Also changed careers to education.
Anyway, just wanted to acknowledge your welcome.
Abiogenesis: arise or arose?
I think I have added the link by mistake. I was in dilemna whether or not teflon filter helps in water purification. I am really sorry for that. Will take care in future to link with related wikipages for better reader's information.
I've noticed your edits to ideal gas law and I consider it is important to specify explicitly that the derivation of ideal gas law is microscopic and to distinguish between macroscopic laws and theoretical derivations involving microscopic considerations.
Also the macroscopic status of the ideal gas law is the same as that of, for example, the law of gravitation and can be taken as a primitive statement/law needing no macroscopic derivation. --126.96.36.199 (talk) 15:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- You are welcome to specify explicitly with a reference noting such microscopic considerations. However, the derivation is mathematical and of itself doesn't depend on a microscope. Vsmith (talk) 15:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
External Link Question
I have recently tried to add a few external links to different wikipedia pages. For example, I tried adding a link to 'Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton' and 'Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune'. Both links were under the url basedirectory.com. I understand that the external links have to be kept to a minimum, but I feel that this site would be beneficial to the viewers of the page. They are most likely living there already or moving there, so they are on the page to look up general information about the base. This site that I suggest offers additional information about the bases, including USO information, local businesses, and other similar information.
The reason why it was declined was because I used 'we' in the edit summary, but I don't work at the website company that I am suggesting. (I don't know if that is why it was turned down or not) I also noticed a similar site listed under Camp Lejeune's external links (dodlodging.com) That site is also great for visitors to utilize, and basedirectory.com would just as useful in the same context.
Is there anyway to have these links reconsidered?
- I'd suggest asking on the talk pages of those articles. Your username along with the use of "we" suggested to me that you may have a conflict of interest. If not - OK, although I would suggest a username change - and avoid edits that may be mistaken for spam or coi. Vsmith (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
- Just letting you know that I've soft blocked the account because of the username. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Besides removing citation notices, he's copy/pasting from other articles so I've made a wholesale revert. He won't be happy but he ignored my post to his talk page this am. He's probably done the same with other articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 17:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
- He's just new though. He's emailed me about the earlier comment I made on this talk page. He needs help I guess. Dougweller (talk) 19:31, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Re: Marcellettim addition removed
My name is Mark Marcelletti and I am the owner of California Environmental Dewatering, creator of http://ced.biz and it's content. We are a specialty chemical company that has proven and verifiable science. I added non-copyrited content to Wikipedia to increase the accuracy of it's content and it was removed. Could you add my edits back in?
- Please read WP:conflict of interest, we aren't here to promote or advertise. Your addition (at least in part) was copied directly from your website which has a copyright notice at the bottom. So - no, I won't re-add your copyrighted material nor add content which promotes your company. Vsmith (talk) 22:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Bizarre edit summary
Oops. Weird glitch. I meant to point out that the pretense tense indicates the current condition, so "is currently" is redundant. Thanks for your edit. Much better. Ground Zero | t 16:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
- No problem, oopses do happen. I've redone the lead sentence on all those mineral list articles. Your edit brought the "poor wording" to my attention. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 16:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Per your message
Yes, I understand completely. I would like to continue contributing to the site though, as I often see articles that lack new research/findings. However, to avoid COI, I will use the original journal abstracts or articles as references.
Thank you for bringing the COI to my attention.
- I'm glad that you understand and hope to see more from you - we need more good content editors. Vsmith (talk) 01:53, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Forum Needed on Wikipedia
As far as I am concerned Wikipedia is full of Admins Generally that are fascist totalitarian truth oppressors that hinder the advancement of human knowledge the stated purpose of Wikipedia. Of course I know the real truth about Wikipedia and that it is a Governmental Intelligence Operation to gather Intelligence. If not then I suggest a major change or addition to Wikipedia that a "Forum" button be placed beside the "Talk" button where people can converse freely on the subject of the article without fear of thought police. 2602:306:C518:6C40:48D2:4370:819A:64A6 (talk) 13:19, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
- Ah - the "real truth". P'raps you should take your forum button idea to WP:Village pump ... or not. Please also read WP:No personal attacks. Vsmith (talk) 13:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
- VSmith, your restraint is amazing, and shall serve as a model for me in the future. Wow! Just... wow! Riventree (talk) 15:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your Welcome and would appreciate your guidance
Thank you for your welcome note and explaining why you made some changes to my edit on Francis Bacon. As you can see I'm very new to this. I would like your guidance on how to get this right. As a Psychologist (1st class honours - many years ago now - I'm 53) who has published in peer-reviewed journals I'm acutely aware of the standards of quality research, but not quite sure how this works in Wikipedia world. After reading Dr Blair-West's book on Francis Bacon and going over his website, I realised that the article on Bacon was lacking. To explain one point, while Blair-West's book is of the 'inspirational' genre he is a medical writer who has published in way more peer-reviewed journals than I have (I have heard him speak as well) and his two other books are non-fiction and well-researched. He previously held an academic appointment at the University of Qld and published research into depression and suicide.
Anyway, his book The Way of The Quest, follows the early childhood of Bacon in historically correct detail - as he says in the Foreword, Blair-West spent some time in the UK researching the life of Bacon. But it is the 28 page appendix he calls the 'Backstory' to be found at the back of the book that I am referencing here. Here he reviews the research into the Shakespeare authorship question and takes it further than I have seen done before. On his website he provides an excerpt from Dodd's book which gives more detail than other authors on what happened in Bacon's "fall from grace" see this page - http://www.thewayofthequest.com/francis-bacon.html If you wish to dismiss this information, can I respectfully suggest that I would think you should review it closely first? As one of the foremost modern authorities (as I would see it) on Francis Bacon, I have been in contact with Dr Blair-West and suggested that he should update aspects of the Bacon page (and the Mont St Michel page - where the book is set).
In terms of using the Amazon link to the book I assumed this would be the easiest for a Wikipedia reader in terms of looking into the reference directly without having to then go and find the book. Would it be better to just reference the book publication with no hyperlink? Or use a link to the author's website?
- Hi Pennylewis, I know nothing about Blair-West's works. When your edit showed up on my watchlist (I've not edited the Francis Bacon page other than vandalism reverting ... as far as I remember) I noticed the Amazon link and followed it. The book is billed as an "inspirational novel" by Amazon which caused more concern. As for using the book as a reference, I'd be dubious - but suggest that you raise the issue on talk:Francis Bacon basically explaining your position there as you did above. Then wait to see what the "regular editors" there think about it. Or you could ask at WP:reliable sources noticeboard. Also as you had added what appeared to be a promotional bit about the book on Mont Saint-Michel ... my mental alarms went off and I thought "only edits .. promoting a book .. possible conflict of interest". I note above that you suggest the author "update aspects of the Bacon page", and there the conflict of interest problem gets more complex.
- The issue of the link to Amazon is more straight-forward - we simply don't promote any commercial website or business. The way to reference a book is to provide the publication details along with a valid ISBN. Anyone can then use the ISBN number to find information about the book via the publisher, Amazon, Barnes & Noble or other such sites.
- With your background, you know what good references are -- the best are peer reviewed journals. Same goes for references on Wikipedia - use the best available. See WP:reliable sources for more nitty gritty advice. :)
- Anyway - after you digest the above links re: the workings of Wikipedia - I hope you stick around - there are lots of articles needing improvement. Vsmith (talk) 00:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining all that. Now I understand the policy more clearly I will do you as you suggest. In terms of the author updating the page, I'm simply suggesting that given that he has researched the subject extensively he should contribute to the WP page. I will use the ISBN in The Mont St Michel page and review this inline with what you have said - I have to balance out respecting and admiring a work from promoting it! Pennylewis (talk) 23:43, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
I am not intentionally warring on the Hydroxy page. I am adding factual, historical applications and original names, dates, and intent of the owner of the name Hydroxy e.g., TR Knudtson . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julian Mark Wayne House (talk • contribs) 03:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
- Seems others view that differently. When your block expires, please discuss your concerns on the talk pages of the articles. Vsmith (talk) 13:11, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello Vsmith. I wonder if I could ask you to check out the ISASMELT edit history and related talk page. It looks like the author wrote a marketing article but got it through the approval process. I am insufficiently experienced to know what to do (if anything); If all is well, just tell me to STFU :) 188.8.131.52 (talk) 15:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Seems User:ChrisFountain has explained thing on the article talk. The article is well written and referenced and seems ok - could probably use a tweak or two - and maybe some criticism if sources are available. I've put it on me watchlist. Vsmith (talk) 21:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Sandbox category removal
I am not sure that you have the experience to edit the article on the Galileo affair. Your edit restored a number of untrue remarks on points of fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 12:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Copying content from copyrighted material, either print or web based, has always been "a problem". I posted on your talk "now" because your edits just came to my attention. If "other people do exactly the same" - then they too are in violation. Have you read the WP:Copyvio page? If not, then read the second paragraph carefully. Do you not understand the seriousness of the problem? What other pages have you added content in violation of copyright? I will be checking further as time allows and if further violations are found that will also be removed. Or, you could go back and rewrite and copied content that you may have added to other articles to avoid the problem. Any future violations will be treated differently, as you now know the rules. Vsmith (talk) 20:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining that, but you can save your rude tone for someone else, because I do not appreciate it. I've already starting rewriting the Sasco article, I hope it doesn't anger you as much as my last questions have. (I can see why your students must have felt tortured by you. [Your words, not mine]) Thanks for serving, by the way. And to answer your question "What other pages have you added content in violation of copyright?" Probably a lot, but if you want to worry about it, thats up to you.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- And it is not necessary to respond, because I wont read it. As soon as someone is rude to me I feel absolutely no reason to ever speak with them again--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 20:46, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
External Links to GIA Gem Encyclopedia
- It was good to acknowledge your employer and possible COI. You are most welcome to edit Wikipedia articles to add content, fix errors, ... However, simply adding external links to webpages related to your employment was problematic and appeared promotional. Please find articles that need improvement or subjects lacking Wiki articles and add/improve content. Back your edits with WP:reliable sources and all is well. Vsmith (talk) 20:52, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
This link is a external link with more detail about the Gold Rush History mapped out on a singe global google map. Not affiliate or my link. Just a fan of the forum. This is legit please refer to the wiki rules. SilverGoldForum (talk) 02:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- I would suggest that you get a new username - one that doesn't suggest a WP:conflict of interest. Or simply avoid edits that suggest a coi - specifically adding external links to said forum. Vsmith (talk) 03:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
I thought you would like to read what our friend User:BSmith821 wrote about us (Wikipedia) and our work on "his" Panspermia article: https://astrobiologyfuture.org/resources/76/download/Complete_8865-26.pdf He is the WP editor that was sanitizing the Chandra Wickramasinghe article in order to postulate him for the "highest British honor." Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 17:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I'm writing in regards to you removing the educational resources links from the pages that I edited. I read all the links that you provided by I'm still not clear why you removed the links. The links I posted to www.gia.edu do not contain any advertising and it is all linking to a non-profit educational resource. The pages on each gemstone on gia.edu have a lot of important research information and photos and videos that just can't be added to the Wikipedia pages. Can you please let me know why you feel these links shouldn't be added, and how the links I added are any different from the other links that have been added to the External Links section? Thank you. Kgiordan (talk) 16:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- The links aren't "bad". However, when a new user only adds links to the same website's pages it begins to look like promotion. You are welcome to add verifiable content to WP articles, but just adding external links isn't really that helpful. Please also read WP:COI and if you have a connection to GIA consider that as we aren't here to promote our own work or that of any website/organization. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 19:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)