User talk:Vsmith: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:28, 24 February 2011

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 :-)

Classification of minerals - continued

News from the front. As I understand, IMA - Commission on New Minerals, Nomenclature and Classification (CNMNC) proposes following classes and subclasses: native elements, sulphides, sulphosalts, halides, oxides, hydroxides, arsenites (including antimonites, bismuthites, sulphites, selenites and tellurites), carbonates, nitrates, borates (neso-, soro-, cyclo-, ino-, phyllo- and tectoborates), sulphates, chromates, molybdates, tungstates, phosphates, arsenates, vanadates, silicates (neso-, soro-, cyclo-, ino-, phyllo- and tectosilicates) and organic compounds. (Stuart J. Mills, Frédéric Hatert, Ernest H. Nickel, and Giovanni Ferraris (2009). "The standardisation of mineral group hierarchies: application to recent nomenclature proposals" (PDF). Eur. J. Mineral. 21: 1073–1080. doi:10.1127/0935-1221/2009/0021-1994.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link))

But if u do it this way some old groupings cross classes. Using 01 Native Elements; 02 Sulfides and Sulfosalts (sulfides, selenides, tellurides; arsenides, antimonides, bismuthides; sulfarsenites, sulfantimonites, sulfbismuthites, etc.); 03 Halogenides; 04 Oxides (Hydroxides, V^[5,6] vanadates, arsenites, antimonites, bismuthites, sulfites, selenites, tellurites, iodates); 05 Carbonates and Nitrates; 06 Borates (neso-, soro-, cyclo-, ino-, phyllo- and tectoborates); 07 Sulfates, Selenates, Tellurates; 08 Phosphates, Arsenates, Vanadates; 09 Silicates and Germanates (neso-, soro-, cyclo-, ino-, phyllo- and tectosilicates); 10 Organic Compounds seems better to me. What do u think? I think that I have to avoid the proposed division. Otherwise I'll do too many mistakes, and without ref. for checking it is WP:OR. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are doing good - stick with an established source or sources, it can be modified later if deemed necessary. Vsmith (talk) 23:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thx. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 16:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ancientlights.org

Lots of it about, I'm going through removing it. See [1] - self-published fringe stuff. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 16:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

plus other stuff by him, and ancientgreece-earlyamerica.com. Dougweller (talk) 16:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I see there was quite a bit more than I caught ... looks like promotion of the good drs. fringe ideas. guess he's convinced he's got it all figured out so why should we question? Vsmith (talk) 23:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cambrian Explosion edit undo on 2nd Jan

Hi,

As I'm sure you have discerned I am a novice on Wikipedia and have obviously not met the basic standards in my article. Perhaps you would be kind enough to give me some help on what to do in order to get my idea out there. Do I need to find acceptable sources for refernces? With an idea like mine it is obviously hard to find evidence, perhaps Wikipedia is not the right place to present ideas like these?

Some help and advice would be greatly appreciated.

Regards Bernard Exley (UK)

p.s. You mention Vietnam in your profile, maybe you know Tom Evans from CA, he has a web site elcapreport.com, I met him last Sept when a freind and I climbed The Nose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancefax (talk • contribs) 23:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, we're all new at it when we start... just gotta stick with it and learn. Your edit to Cambrian explosion suffered from original research and synthesis (Please read those pages). You did cite references about the catastrophic Venusian events, but there were no references to connect all that with the panspermia comments. I haven't read your refs - do they imply anything about the panspermia stuff? Also the panspermia hypothesis is likely to be a tad controversial - so it would require rock solid published sources. If you can find those refs, then try again. You might want to discuss proposed additions on the article talk page to get input from experienced editors there.

And, no - haven't met a Tom Evans as far as I remember ... caveat: I spent some 30 yrs. trying to forget/ignore all that ... but have pretty much made peace with it now.

Vsmith (talk) 00:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

edit removal of changes to true polar wander

Hi I am new to editing wikipedia so I apologize for any technical errors that I have made. I have been doing some research on True Polar wander as I am currently editing for the geology journal www.ncgt.org. You removed a paragraph that I added to the article true polar wander siting the reasons as "Due and undue weight", "fringe theory" and "Identifying reliable sources".

I have just registered as Myopicmuppet so that I have a talk page, I am not certain as to the correct ways of making additions to wiki.

As the article itself is a little sparce, undue weight seems a little unfair. In terms of identifying reliable sources Peter James Bsc, Msc(eng) Phd, DIC making reference to calculations by Thomas Gold seems rather good to me. In terms of fringe theory..... polar wander itself causes some problems for plate tectonics if the rate of wander is greater than 1 degree every million years, it cant just be that figure because it is convenient to the current model of plate tectonics. In addition to this Paleomagnetic data and fossil records of geographic locations of corals make a compelling argument for polar wander so there is potential for additional knowledge to be added to this article, if only as an alternate theory.

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myopticmuppet (talk • contribs) 00:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The cited source is published by Polar Press. Looking at their website [2], I see four very non-mainstream fringe titles. That website alone simply shows their WP:fringe nature. The ref is not a WP:RS. Thomas Gold published several "interesting" hypotheses - but as I understand, those ideas have not had a sustained effect on mainstream geophysics. I'd suggest taking the topic to the talk page talk:True polar wander and see what response you get there. Without reliable sources the content doesn't belong on the article. I'm going to be busy and likely not on Wikipedia much for a short while.

It's good that you now have a Wikipedia identity, it makes communicating much easier. And I wish you well in your Wiki experience. Vsmith (talk) 12:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Life

When I added a section in the lede about life in fiction, I was completing the pattern of physical life, life "in philosophy and religion,...", and life in speculative fiction. You undid the change because "the lead summarizes the article and nothing about fiction exists in article body." But nothing about "in philosophy and religion" exists in the article body also. Should the paragraph beginning "in philosophy and religion" also be deleted? Or should a section be added to the article to address life in philosophy, religion, and speculative fiction? Or should a hatnote direct the reader to other articles on life? Or is a hatnote to life (disambiguation) sufficient? Obankston (talk) 04:14, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The simplest solution is a hatnote "This article is about biological life. For other uses, see life (disambiguation) or life form." Obankston (talk) 04:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems this should be discussed at talk:Life. Also perhaps you should "flesh out" the life forms list using good refs prior to promoting it. Vsmith (talk) 13:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with the good refs in life form arose after life was edited. The issue with the good refs in life form has been resolved. Obankston (talk) 17:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New user using two almost identical usernames

Hi Vsmith, from the edits to Ramapo Fault, I noticed that a new editor appears to be using two accounts, probably by mistake, User:Alan kafka and User:Alan Kafka. I have suggested on User talk:Alan kafka that he get an admin to help sort this out and mentioned your name, hope that was OK. Cheers, Mikenorton (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commented on user's talk. Fixing it requires bureaucrat action. Vsmith (talk) 00:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And I thought that you were omnipotent - thanks for pointing him in the right direction. Cheers, Mikenorton (talk) 09:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Buckland and the King's Heart

There's an informative leaflet from the Oxford University Museum of Natural History about Buckland here, which mentions his dietary explorations. Enjoy! DuncanHill (talk) 02:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, refs are good ... enjoyed your link :) Vsmith (talk) 03:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look over the article more closely over the next few days if I get the time. Between the ODNB article (do you have access? If not, I can email articles to you if you like and don't mind giving me an email address) and the Oxford pamphlet, and a few books of mine I think it could be improved. I've had a fondness for the chap ever since I was a geology undergraduate - his scatological sense of humour (and willingness to make use of live hyenas to test his theories) appealed to me and to many of my lecturers. DuncanHill (talk) 03:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting out my two accounts

Hi, I was told that you can help me to sort out my two accounts, one of which I created by mistake.

By mistake, I created an account named "Alan kafka", but I meant to create an account named "Alan Kafka". After I created the second account, I mistakingly edited as both User:Alan kafka and User:Alan Kafka.

Can this be fixed so that all of my Wikipedia work will be under the name User:Alan Kafka?

Thanks,

~ Alan Kafka

Alan Kafka (talk) 03:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Alan kafka as I left some information for you there in response to Mike's note above. The process of merging user names requires bureaucrat help. Vsmith (talk) 03:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could get a bit... Kafkaesque William M. Connolley (talk) 09:06, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nualgi

Hi

I have added references to our product Nualgi on a few pages.

Nualgi is a revolutionary new invention.

It is perhaps the only Nano technology product to deliver micro nutrients to Diatom Algae and Plants.

Diatoms are very useful organisms, there are reports of a decline in Diatoms and this is paralleled by a decline in fish.

You may have noted the increase in news about dead zones, algal blooms and fish kills, this too may be due to decline in Diatoms.

Diatoms are the best good for vertebrate fish.

They are perhaps more efficient in use of sunlight and they consume less oxygen at night and they sink on death (other algae float).

These points and many others are very important and have not got the attention they deserve.

We are promoting the use of Diatoms to solve water pollution problems and perhaps global warming.

best regards

Bhaskar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhaskarmv (talk • contribs) 15:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The key problem is highlited by your statement above: "our product Nualgi". Wikipedia is not here for product promotion, simple as that. So - stop. Vsmith (talk) 22:38, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Borates

Borate minerals redirects to Borate. Londonite and Rhodizite redirect to Borate mineral. weird. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 04:35, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Borate minerals now redirects to borate mineral. Lots of weird 'round here :) Vsmith (talk) 12:16, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx, I just was not sure if u'd want to move Borate mineral to Borate minerals. Yup, Wikipedia is a weird bulding site ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 15:45, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... I see, the plural form makes more sense to me - but seems I haven't been consistent in the past, see silicate mineral, oxide mineral, sulfate mineral ... Guess its time to address my inconsistency. Vsmith (talk) 16:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consistencized a bit :) Vsmith (talk) 16:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mineral regulations

Hi, You recently deleted above page. The same text has again be posted at Certified Authenticated Mineral Specimen Regulator and it certainly looks like a copyvio. But Google doesn't seem to turn up anything. So if you now where the text is from, go ahead and delete the delete the new page as well. Travelbird (talk) 13:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, looks like NawlinWiki got it already. Vsmith (talk) 13:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jerrygibbsite

Having spent a few hours on the article myself, I was very pleased to see your extensive revisions. They have greatly improved the quality of the article. However, there are some things that you removed which may be of general interest, such as only 5 examples being known to exist. Perhaps it could be double-checked? Thanks for the great edit! Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:57, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to turn a school term paper into an article. If I "over-did" on removing stuff, feel free to re-add. Personally not sure the five sample bit is that notable - and likely to change, but if you feel it's important and reliably sourced then you are welcome to put it back. Reading over the Dunn paper, it states the samples were from old collection samples labeled leucophoenicite and not readily identifiable w/out X-ray diffraction ... so there are undoubtedly other as yet unidentified specimens sitting on collector's shelves or museum cabinets. Vsmith (talk) 16:57, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I must admit that is some good logic. Okay, so long as it is written to be rare (like it is in your revision) that is good enough for me. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Jack Ertle Oliver

On 20 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jack Ertle Oliver, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a 1968 paper by Jack Ertle Oliver helped confirm the existence of continental drift, a theory that had been scoffed at by mainstream scientists when proposed by Alfred Wegener in 1912? 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.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kraisit Chaikaeo

Hi! My name Kraisit. I'm trying to create a page about myself because I'm a musician and a singer. Can you please help me. You can also email me at KraiChaikaeo@live.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kraichaikaeo (talk • contribs) 20:20, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well ... looks like I missed the activities, sorry 'bout that. You need to read and follow Wikipedia policies. As to your specific question - the answer is simple: We don't use Wikipedia to promote ourselves or our work. Read conflict of interest. If you are notable as a musician then someone else may write your article. Go, make your music and let someone else do the article writing. Vsmith (talk) 01:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of Amazon Rainforest

Are you willing to give pending changes a try? Either now or at the end of the current protection? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will consider - hadn't heard much about it lately. Vsmith (talk) 14:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What of Talk:Amazon Rainforest? 99.190.84.7 (talk) 19:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mooihoekite

Hello Vsmith. I deleted some tags on Mooihoekite, now I need assistance :o) Could u read the Mooihoekite#Optical Properties section please? Thx. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 12:14, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup - done :) Vsmith (talk) 14:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx :) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Optical dating

An article that you have been involved in editing, Optical dating, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. — Wdfarmer (talk) 09:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aquifer / overdrafting

Dear Sir

Scientific research is as we know a continuous process of observation and innovation which is increasingly subject to the market paradigm where funding is key. I have neither the time, the inclination or the funding to pursue this idea so I thought I would put it out there and see if it would float. After all ideas are not created by thought but merely come to light when it is time and as such a good idea is liable to self-propagate despite market forces. As you are probably aware the avaritic interest groups seeking to permanently control the distribution of carbon dioxide (a naturally occurring gas essential for life which now has the status of pollutant!are strong and growing stronger. In a system as complex as Gaia forcing effects will be numerous and they should be considered and quantified - not to mention that the effects of a highly unsustainable drawdown are likely to be as potent as those climatic changes which drawdown helps to cause.

Please see latest edit.

Aquifer drawdown or overdrafting and the pumping of fossil water has led to increases in the total amount of water within the hydrosphere available to transpiration and evaporation processes. This has in turn led to increased water vapour and cloud cover which have the largest capacity to absorb infrared radiation in the earth's atmosphere. Adding water to the system must therefore have a forcing effect on the whole earth system which in turn changes reactively. An accurate estimate of the forcing effect due to this hydrogeological fact is yet to be quantified.

203.8.131.32 (talk) 22:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC) Peter Dew MSc(CE)[reply]

Sorry 'bout that, but unreferenced WP:OR doesn't belong here. If you can provide a reliable source or sources for your added content please provide such. Vsmith (talk) 23:35, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

I've just proposed Independent scholar for deletion. Kitfoxxe (talk) 21:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk

I have replied on my talk page. Volcanoguy 01:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Minerals

Edit summaries: Xocomecatlite ‎("hmm - no tellurate min cat ... OK then under sulfate") and Xocomecatlite ("not a telluride, recat, plus a bit") If the people can't see a difference between tellurites & selenites (Nickel-Strunz Classification -04- Oxides), tellurates & selenates (Nickel-Strunz Classification -07- Sulfates) and tellurides & selenides (Nickel-Strunz Classification -02- Sulfides); should we give up and make a cat:Tellurium minerals and a cat:Selenium minerals instead ??? Or a category:Tellurite and selenite minerals (4), category:Tellurate and selenate minerals (4), category:Telluride minerals (19) and category:Selenide minerals (15) is better ??? --Chris.urs-o (talk) 08:38, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I had assumed category:Tellurium minerals existed, seems all the other element min cats do. But it sure isn't a telluride. As it is such a rare mineral, didn't feel up to making a new cat for it -- how many tellurate minerals exist? Your idea of combined tellurate - selenate min cats may be better, but even combined how many are there? Haven't counted :) Vsmith (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is how many minerals containing selenium and tellurium Wikipedia has. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted the Category:Telluride and selenide minerals page as redundant now that you have fixed the selenide mineral cats. I assume you had no further plans for it. Vsmith (talk) 17:23, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. Cat:Telluride minerals has 20 items and cat:Selenide minerals has 15 items. They don't need to be merged. I assumed they were less. Cat:Tellurate and selenate minerals needs another stub :p, I'll try to make one on monday. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Selenite minerals should get a delete too. Thx --Chris.urs-o (talk) 20:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nickel-Strunz 10 ed has 13 cat:Tellurate and selenate minerals, secondary minerals as a product of oxidation are rare. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 11:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Identification of Minerals

Is a sortable table as article allowed on Wikipedia? --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen them used elsewhere and am not aware of any rule against their use. Vsmith (talk) 13:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See almost any list of earthquakes e.g. list of 20th century earthquakes and list of earthquakes in Greece. Mikenorton (talk) 14:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. What do you both think about it? It is just a test right now; c. 1,300 categories on commons, it'd need 2011. Is it something useful? A sortable table can be destroyed easily by vandalism... --Chris.urs-o (talk) 14:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, however I have a concern that a list by properties for identification which includes the rare minerals is it sorta loses its usefulness - the end user gets lost in all the rare mineral details. Why not leave a note on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geology for more input. Vsmith (talk) 00:39, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sysop ;) I'll do A, O, Y and Z lil by lil, and I'll see how it works. I'm orienting myself on Commons (c. 1,300 categories of minerals); my old booklet for identification of minerals has c. 500 minerals. It doesn't seem too bad for me. Afterwards, I'll ask WikiProject Geology for input... --Chris.urs-o (talk) 13:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Manhattan Project

This user helped promote Manhattan Project to good article status.

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to note my appreciation for being one of the people that helped to raise the quality of the Manhattan Project article. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:47, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on your reverted edits on Anthropization ...

Please comment on your reverted edits on Anthropization ... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthropization&diff=413477216&oldid=413380363 99.181.133.237 (talk) 05:47, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you comment or rather discuss your concerns on the talk page there? Or, better yet, why don't you get an account and cease edit warring on various articles as an ip hopper. Perhaps all those pages should be semi'd to give Arthur a break. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 13:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS, thanks Chris for fixing the formatting :) Vsmith (talk) 13:51, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yw, I did not get it 100% ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notifying 202.14.216.128

I noticed that you didn't use a blockage template when you blocked this IP I reported. I'm just wondering why.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

er... look again, what's the rush? Vsmith (talk) 20:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like problem solved! xD. Cheers.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What problem? Vsmith (talk) 20:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was just concerned about the fact that WP policy requires admins to notify users of a block. However, the uw-vandal series of templates says blocking may occur w/o notice, so it's kind of a grey zone.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:12, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"just concerned..." Seems I saw a vandal reported, checked it out, blocked said vandal, left note to vandal w/in 'bout 3 minutes, and w/in said ~ 3 mins you decide to harass me for some perceived failure to follow some policy... or something like that. Irritated. Vsmith (talk) 20:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still learning. Sorry if you were bothered. I was assuming good faith.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Tea#February_2011 Thank you.

Wikipedia:Tea#February_2011 Thank you. 99.181.145.10 (talk) 20:21, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

composting toilet edit

dear vsmith:

Why have you deleted our company, Advanced Composting Systems, from the list of Makers on the composting toilet entry?? I do not understand why only certain manufactures are allowed to be listed and also allowed to have a wiki entry. We are probably the largest manufacturer of large composting systems in the US and we manufacture the best composting toilet in the world. Our web site is www.compostingtoilet.com. I too have an MA, in Physics, and would like to rewrite the entire composting toilet entry to me more scientifically correct but I am concerned that my efforts would be immediately deleted.

Thanks, Glenn Nelson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glenn.g.n.nelson (talk • contribs) 13:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not here to promote our commercial interests. Please read conflict of interest. The article in question could use some help, but your stated COI is problematic. Ideally the composting toilet article and an article on your company would be improved by someone with no commercial connection. Vsmith (talk) 14:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please see User talk:Riednelson and please use only one account to edit.

You may note that I've removed the problematic List of makers from the article. Vsmith (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara article is suffering vandalism from a User

Hello, Western Sahara article is suffering vandalism from a User Maurimanya [3] he is deleting some important information based on UN sources to replace it by some false information from a spanish non-neutral institute [[4]] Please can you take some measures againt this user ? h'is vandalizing also the discussion page, see this [5]

Thank you in advance --Yusuf ibn Tashfin (talk) 15:15, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara article is suffering vandalism from a User:Yusuf ibn Tashfin

Hello, Western Sahara article is suffering vandalism from a User Yusuf ibn Tashfin [6] he is deleting some important information based on UN sources [7].

I hope to answer. MauriManya (talk) 15:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reference that MauriManya is advancing [8] (UN resolution 1542) doesn't have any tie with the conflict of western sahara, in this reference the word "western sahara" does not appear anytime, this source is invalid. Moreover, this user is deleting a very useful UN reference which is Whitfield, Teresa. Friends Indeed?: The United Nations, Groups of Friends, and the Resolution of Conflict. 2007, page 191, this is a vandalism.

Please can you warn him please? Thanks in advance --Yusuf ibn Tashfin (talk) 18:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully you two can resolve your differences at Talk:Western Sahara now that the article is under full protection. Vsmith (talk) 00:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sea Level has stopped rising

The Sea Level has stopped rising. So it is quite stupid to have an article claiming it isn't based on data from the 1990's.

Yes ... I understand many AGW followers claim a 1000mm sea level rise will occur int he next 90 years.

But it has never come close to 11mm a year.

And in 2010, for the 2nd time in 5 years, the satellie record shows a drop.

Don't you feel even slightly guilty for misleading so many people? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.67.12.154 (talk) 07:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a William Connolly pseudonym?

@@ Line 320: / Line 320: @@
 Don't you feel even slightly guilty for misleading so many people?  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/70.67.12.154|70.67.12.154]] ([[User talk:70.67.12.154|talk]]) 07:26, 24 February 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+== Are you a William Connolly pseudonym? ==
+Are you a William Connolly pseudonym?