Jump to content

User talk:Headbomb: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Redirect: new section
m Reverted edits by Steve Quinn (talk) to last version by MiszaBot III
Line 54: Line 54:


That would be great. It's not urgent; we managed for years without it. -- [[User:Jitse Niesen|Jitse Niesen]] ([[User talk:Jitse Niesen|talk]]) 20:10, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
That would be great. It's not urgent; we managed for years without it. -- [[User:Jitse Niesen|Jitse Niesen]] ([[User talk:Jitse Niesen|talk]]) 20:10, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

==Redirect==

Hello. The redirect that you created today [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biochemistry_(Moscow)_Supplemental_Series_B:_Biomedical_Chemistry_(Russian_Journal_of_Physical_Chemistry_B)&action=history here] is probably not correct. It appears to me that there is no journal with the name of this redirect in either russian or english. I see that it is related to some citation on Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Academic_Journals/Journals_cited_by_Wikipedia/B7 here]. However, that citation, wherever it is, is probably inaccurate.

I am thinking that this is turning into quite a mess.

So to continue, the main-space page where [[Russian Journal of Physical Chemistry B]] now resides, was a redirect which was necessarily [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Academic_Journals&diff=571297489&oldid=571223746 speedily deleted] to make way for this article.

Furthermore, on the Springer website, please notice that [http://www.springer.com/chemistry/physical+chemistry/journal/11826 Russian Journal of Physical Chemistry B] is not the same as the journal that goes by both names [http://www.springer.com/life+sciences/biochemistry+%26+biophysics/journal/10541 Biokhimiya and Biochemistry (Moscow)]. And, it could be argued that none of these journals is the same as [http://www.springer.com/chemistry/organic+chemistry/journal/11828 Biochemistry (Moscow) Supplement Series B: Biomedical Chemistry].

Therefore, first of all, the redirect that you created today seems to be inaccurate and I request that you request it be speedy deleted. Second, somehow, the citation that this is based on might have to be corrected. Third, the mess that is known as "What links here" to [[Biokhimiya]], (most likely created by different editors along the way) proabably needs to be straightened out. Also, I am sure that the Russian publisher, MAIK Nauka/Interperiodica will show the same distinctions between these journals.

I will help straighten this out, but I prefer to follow your lead in this matter to avoid confusion, cross purposes, and misunderstandings. So, let me know what you need from me, if anything.

Thanks. --- [[User:Steve Quinn|Steve Quinn]] ([[User talk:Steve Quinn|talk]]) 02:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:04, 4 September 2013

User Talk Archives My work Sandbox Resources News Stats

Hi Headbomb,

I userfied this template to User:Dimension10/Permanently protected or else, and deleted the cross-space redirect, so the helpful TFD bot promptly closed your TFD nomination. If you just thought that it shouldn't be in template space, problem solved. If you think the new page shouldn't exist either, then I think you'll have to open a new MFD. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:20, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quark

I don't know why you undid 'nucleus' to 'atom' again, if you read carefully the original paper (Reference 43)it clearly stated 'gold nucleus' twice, not atom.

The original paper is easily accessible on web. Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uscbino (talkcontribs) 15:26, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the atom mass is pretty much the same as a the nucleus mass, and is a more accessible comparison point for layreaders. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

For the major reference cleanup at List of microorganisms tested in outer space, my hat off. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 22:54, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@BatteryIncluded: No problems. In general, you can just use {{cite journal|doi=10.xxxx/....}} or similar ({{cite journal|pmid=...}}), and ask User:Citation bot to take care of things for you. It's not perfect (hence why I insert "pre arranged" empty citation templates with all the parameters I think it could use), but it's a very nifty bot. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 01:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the tools!. I thought I had to be a computer wiz to do that. I will look into it. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 12:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An invitation

I wish to invite you to this discussion (on Randykitty's talk page) and maybe you can give your point of view or assessment. --- Steve Quinn (talk) 04:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AAlertBot request

Hello, first of all thanks for your kind explanation in reply to my rather naive question on Talk:Baryon. I am slowly making my way through Quantum Mechanics, vol. 1, by Cohen-Tannoudji, as you recommended, and I'm finding it very readable.

The reason I'm writing you is the following. I operate User:Jitse's bot which updates Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Current activity. I was thinking about using AAlertBot for some tasks (following XfD discussions etc.), so that I do not duplicate work. The problem is that WikiProject Mathematics does not use a category or template to tag its articles. Instead, we have lists like Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/List of mathematics articles (A). Is there a possibility to extend AAlertBot so that it can take the list of articles from a list? If it simplifies things for you, I could gather all links in one page, in whatever format is most convenient for you. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 18:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I could add a "gather all links from page" method to find all project's pages, in this case from Math's list(s) like that (I didn't know those exist). But it'll have to wait may be a couple weeks as I can't work on it atm. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:14, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great. It's not urgent; we managed for years without it. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 20:10, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]