User talk:Vsmith

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 :-)

Archives

Archive list

Archive 1 7/7/2004 - 6/15/2005 Archive 2 6/15/2005 - 9/6/2005 Archive 3 9/6/2005 - 1/01/2006 Archive 4 1/1/2006 - 5/31/2006 Archive 5 5/31/2006 - 8/15/2006 Archive 6 8/15/2006 - ~11/30/06 Archive 7 11/30/2006 - 1/31/07 Archive 8 2/01/07 - 5/17/07 Archive 9 5/17/07 - 8/31/07 Archive 10 9/01/07 - 12/31/07 Archive 11 01/01/08 - 06/30/08 Archive 12 07/01/08 - 09/30/08 Archive 13 10/01/08 - 12/31/08 Archive 14 01/01/09 - 06/30/09 Archive 15 07/01/09 - 12/31/09 Archive 16 01/01/10 - 06/30/10 Archive 17 07/01/10 - 12/31/10 Archive 18 01/01/11 - 07/01/11 Archive 19 07/01/11 - 12/31/11 Archive 20 01/01/12 - 08/31/12

Edit war brewing at Yosemite National Park

If you have some spare energy, please come and lend a hand. Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 17:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Looked ... acted ... :) Vsmith (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I was also approached recently with regards to possible edits to the Yosemite National Park article. My input on the matter can be found at the following link;

user talk:Edit Centric#Hantavirus Risk in Yosemite

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Edit Centric (talk • contribs) 10:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Noted, Vsmith (talk) 12:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thmc1 / 173.63.176.93 sill sockpuppeting / REPLYU REQUSTED

This person (blocked sockmaster Thmc1) is still block evading by not logging in, even after he was warned by SysAdmin Kudpung. I would suggest that you block the suspected IPs(173.63176.93, 74.88.160.244) as well as IPs used by his other blocked account (Nyc88) and any other accounts affiliated w/them. Why are sockppuppets of a blocked sockmaster still allowed to edit even after ample warnings? To make matters worse, he even violated his block and continuted editing the day after he was blocked! Please see Thmc1 sockpuppet investigation archive for latest investigation/evidence[1]. MBaxter1 (talk) 18:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

No clue -- links would be helpful. Vsmith (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Actually I think it's the other way around, if I'm not mistaken, I think I remember MBaxter1 (talk) being mentioned to admin Ronhjones as a possible sockpuppet in the past few months in conjunction with an edit disagreement issue. Are you stocking this address? Is this some sort of retaliation? First of all, I have no idea who any of these other users are, much less others who use this IP address. 173.63.176.93 (talk) 19:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... Thanks, I think, hadn't noticed the 173... above was the same as the 173... I just talked to .. still no clue why MBaxter showed up here. Aw well - keep on keepin' on Vsmith (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Vsmith- Don't let 173.63.176.93 fool you. It was him who attempted to mention this to RonHJones using IP 74.88.160.244. That IP was found to be one of 173.63.176.93's sockpuppet and blocked after a recent investigation. 173.63.176.93 is actually a sockpuppet of Thmc1, blocked for excessive sockpuppeting back in 2010. Even though 173.63.176.93 was ruled most likley as one of Thmc1's sockpuppet, he was let off with a warning. For the full story, I suggest that you check out Thmc1's most recent investigation, August 2012[2]. The final assessment was one account (Nyc88) permanently blocked, one IP temporarily blocked, and one left open with warning. If he causes you anymore trouble, you should report this to the SysAdmins and don't hesitate to mention the sockpuppet investigation. The reverting of your edits is the same kind of BS he conducted on the London City article that got him blocked back in 2010. He has an anti-UK bias amongst many, and you can confirm this with user Eraserhead1.MBaxter1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hantavirus

VSmith, I actually came to your talk page for a different reason and just happened to notice this. It looks ridiculous and I think this MBaxter1 character is highly suspicious himself. In the meantime, can you please look at this story seen on the main CNN.com page today? http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/health/hantavirus-warnings/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

I think that this Yosemite hantavirus story is worthy of at least brief mention in the article because it is now having international implications. I just don't see a justification in ignoring it completely, thanks.173.63.176.93 (talk) 20:56, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Does the article have a current events section? The hantavirus bit isn't history, and as it is notable, it should be discussed on the hantavirus page ... haven't checked. And, no, don't think we need a current events section on the page ... WP:notnews. Vsmith (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm confused----is there some sort of differentiation you're making between the two pages by Wikipedia standards? I would think this should be mentioned on both pages and cross-linked to each other.173.63.176.93 (talk) 00:31, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Se WP:Due weight or somewhere... Is this discussed on the hantavirus page? I'm aware that some users think that every news headline should be splashed accross any semi-relevant article. However, I'm not one of those. If the event stays hot and is important in the broader context of the article in say 6 months -- then maybe. Wikipedia is not a sensationalist tabloid, it's not a newspaper (see wikinews for that), it is supposed to be an encyclopedia - and entries here should have enduring significance to the subject. Vsmith (talk) 00:55, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Not trying to spam

Hi vsmith, You recently removed my edits from a few chemistry related terms in which I added links to the External Link sections. I thought it would be useful to have a more simplified version of these definitions, which is what the external links offered. It wasn't to dictionary.com as mentioned. Just wanted to clarify it wasn't spam, again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themaab (talk • contribs) 19:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, it was to chemistry-dictionary.com instead, another one-liner. External links should provide more info ... not less. Vsmith (talk) 19:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

SMOKE CREEK DESERT, NEVADA

re: Smoke Creek Desert, Nevada =- thanks for some of the clean up - I'll try to find the cites, they disappeared when I decided it was faster to compose in word than on the page and then copy and paste - some cites took and some didn't - eg: the ECV (E. Clampus Vitus) maps they put together - I'll try to find those - but the picture has me confused - the credit says 'Denver, co' - then the smoke creek - it looks like it might be the smoke creek - though the edge of the basin is FAR more telling as it is a 'charged' basin -- unlike the others - Winnemucca Lake (Lake Winnemucca) and the Black Rock Desert -which are charge-discharge basins. The tracks of vehicles and their detritus give ample warning of the nature of that particular basin. -- could you clarify the origin of the photo- having done a fair amount of work out there, that photo would have had to have been shot from the basin itself - unlikely except in late August/early September if I recall correctly.

Yeah, I was Navy Independent Duty Corpsman (entered at E-5 because I had all but one semester of college to do in a double Micro/Etomoloty major and turned down their OCS offer since I was headed for CO anyway and left USN as a E-8 without TIR but it didn't matter as I was mustered out w/o record to work for Nixon (who 'stopped' bio warfare) through different pay checks each month. I was forced to do 5 (as in FIVE!) back-to-back tours many of which were with the 2/5th and 3/5th Marines then the 2/5th and then a VERY short stint with the 3/4th(?) - but worked all regions from I through IV since I was 'unattached' to The Corps -- and 5 years is a LONG time to spend in cournty. Yes-- what a long strange trips it's been. My last tour was too weird - But the trade off was we'll give you a choice - no combat, no military record (eg no VA), and we'll let you do bio-research (mass distraction use of bacteria, rot cotton) and give you a Masters when you go back to the real world. I guess that's here had to tell what's real after a bit. But I LOVE the desert because you can see things coming a LONG way away. Then I earned multiple MS/A's and ended up with an Ed.D. in Special Ed, and am now retired.

Anyway I went to check on Smoke Creek after the Burners finished another season destroying The Black Rock and some of the most fragile environment in the world, and despoiling the Holy and Sacred sties of the Pyramid Band of the Paiute, and the Western Shoshone and wanted to see if anyone had picked up on the dead-end references that were hanging fire waiting for someone to catch-- which means a few hours tracking down maps for cites. thanks for pushing me - no need to contact me, I'll have it done in the next month or so, depending on how tired I get of dial-up speeds - live rural and deal with both the good and the bad. thanks again my friend. I won't be back here to get an answer, but will try to find those maps, they are not as buried as Freemont's maps were but FAR more easy to find than the rail-road maps themselves! - Pgalioni (talk) 21:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC) "thank you for your service" LOL! ---

And thank you. I had to look it up, seems no one has touched that article since your & my edits last year. Good luck finding those maps. I may do some digging on USGS sites ... or not - lots to do. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 22:21, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Page deletion

Thanks for doing that, I was hoping to get some sort of response from the editor, but you saved me from tagging it - the end result would have been the same. Mikenorton (talk) 23:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Looked quite obvious and the user seems non-responsive to your request or the problems with their image uploads. Vsmith (talk) 00:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Michigan guy is back

Hi, FYI I think he's on right now 97.86.80.98 (talk · contribs) NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

If so he moved on see User talk:141.218.36.99. Vsmith (talk) 22:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

FYI, I asked James to tell the server that sock has restarted the block clocks.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Request

This User:Mrt3366 is reverting the edits, inserting pov templates, and putting <···!> in the article to hide text, of Human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir, when asked on the talk page of the article he uses harsh words. My request is kindly take a look on the history, talk page and article and act accordingly so that the encyclopaedic values of the article are not lost. Thank you sir.  MehrajMir ' ^(Talk) 11:57, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Unacceptable

I have reverted your unacceptable removal of the see also link to a documentary that is directly related to the lake. Placing the relevant link is not "promotion of a film", your removal of it however reeks of something considerably less than encyclopedically acceptable. --87.79.208.194 (talk) 12:18, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Page is back

Hi Vsmith, Bedrock Geology UK North is back I'm afraid. Mikenorton (talk) 16:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

hmm... and gone again. Stuff goes on while I'm off playing. :) Vsmith (talk) 12:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Help?

I don't often ask these things (in fact this is a first), but there sometimes come times in which I cannot contain my disdain of a certain class of administrator-- in this case several who are looking out for a buddy who is a music afficionado or musician, who nevertheless feels the lay need to edit articles on the philosophy of medicine. [3]. This is going to inevitably escalate to a civility block (simply because users get blocked when insulting admins). Would you consider showing up as an admin on my "side"? SBHarris 02:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout that. Seems that it's sometimes best to move on. You gotta avoid the "civility police" actions. And yes, the cliques are bothersome. I avoid Jimbo's blog and the regulars there and dislike the cronyism that goes on. Focus on content and keep on truckin'. Vsmith (talk) 10:50, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit War on Authoritarianism Article, again with same user. Request for Mediation

Hi VSmith, there's an ongoing problem happening on the Authoritarianism article. Currently the user Zeraful and Cresix have been reverting all 3 of my edits on that article, for reasons that are not sufficiently justifiable and are totally senseless. The user Zeraful deleted some content critical of the Vietnamese gov't, like of how Hanoi blocked Facebook, how Vietnam is on the Reporters Without Borders "Enemies of the Internet" blacklist and how the Vietnamese government suppresses protests in the country like in 2011, in a paragraph in the article that are true and had proper and sufficient citations with sources to credible international news website articleslike Forbes and The Economist. Then, an ip user tried to reinstate those deleted items and added additional content. That ip's edits were reverted by Crecix (who used twinkle) with no reason provided. After that, after seeing what's going on in the article, I came in and reinstated the article version of that ip user, after checking the changes in content, and I saw nothing wrong with the change in content by that ip and nothing wrong with the sources they provided. I added an additional source to one of the deleted items as well, from the DART Center website from Columbia University. Then, my edits were reverted by Zeraful and Crecix, claiming that "sources are needed to back [the deleted content] up", and "verification of sources failed", even though the items in dispute do have sufficient and credible sources (you can check the sources for yourself as well). Can you please help in trying to resolve this issue? I would greatly appreciate your efforts in trying to find a resolution to this. As well on a side note, the user Zeraful has a chronic problem of blanking out content, that are factual and recognized by academics, that usually have sources to back them up, that are critical or exposing anything negative of the Vietnamese communist govt, and has done this in numerous articles in the past, like on the North Vietnam article, and imparting pro-communist POV statements in encyclopeadic articles, with no or invalid and unacceptable sources. Zeraful also engages in "wording wars", trying to change words used in articles to make articles sound less critical of the Vietnamese regime, often changing things to the point that sentences are grammatically incorrect. Nguyen1310 (talk) 06:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

As of now, i'm not going to continue editing this article until mediation begins. I have just remembered 3rr, and i'm not going to let that Zeraful drive me over that.Nguyen1310 (talk) 06:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Addressing zeraful's claims: removal of factual content, especially sourced ones, out of dislike or not wanting others to see it, IS censorship. Zeraful accuses me of POV, but really the info and content I contribute are true, factual, and usually sourced and supported content, with sources from reputable sources, which can be found in the North Vietnam article, the Authoritarianism article, and many others. The sources that Zeraful presents, like from vietnamnet.vn and tuoitre.vn, are on articles irrelevant to the content that he claims to support (I read the article for myself and know this, Zeraful hopes that no one on English wiki can read Vietnamese by sourcing to irrelevant Vietnamese-language webpages). Zeraful regularly imparts pro-communist commentary, not encyclopedic type material (more for blogs instead) in articles like the North Vietnam article and Battle of Khe Sanh article and many others (esp. look at those articles' talk pages), and very often Zeraful's content is very historically incorrect (look at the North Vietnam article talk page for yourself). Zeraful also engaged in personal attacks, telling me to "go get a life" in his edit summary on the Authoritarianism article, for example, and is very dishonest, like saying that I deleted sources from the BBC or Alexa, even though I clearly didn't and is still there in my reinstations, and like saying that he didn't delete content in the North Vetnam article when he clearly did. Zeraful also doesn't engage in developing compromised edits and solutions, like in the Authoritarianism and North Vietnam article, where he kept reverting my edits, and i'm the only one who delivered a compromised edit, in both articles. I also know that Zeraful is following and tracking my edits, which is very concerning. Nguyen1310 (talk) 07:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Nguyen1310

This user often add section without sources, and label other users as "communist censorship", like in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=North_Vietnam&action=history. He is also changing word and content of the article to fit his own point of view, and when I present sources, he claim that they're "partisan" and deleted it, even if one of them come from BBC, and one from Alexa.--Zeraful (talk) 07:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I've given you both a 24 hr vacation from editing for 3rr violations on Authoritarianism. Vsmith (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Chrysocolla gallery

Hi, I noticed you recently deleted the gallery at Chrysocolla. I thought it served a useful purpose, as Commons currently has 374 (!) photos of chrysocolla, to pick out a small subset to help our users visualize some of the varieties -- and the beauty -- of this mineral. Could you take another look at the gallery? Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 03:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Pete, will take another look and p'raps restore a couple of those. As it was it seemed there were too many and as you say commons has a lot. Will check for specific relevant images to illustrate points in the article. Vsmith (talk) 10:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I may fiddle with the format -- article currently has an unfortunate narrow "gutter" of text between fotos & infobox. Gallery avoids this.

And thanks for the other improvements! Cheers -- Pete Tillman (talk) 01:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Bedrock Geology UK - Archaean and Palaeoproterozoic

I have noticed that you deleted the page "Bedrock Geology UK - Archaean and Palaeoproterozoic" by Rhondeag on the ground of Implausible typos (R3). I am a colleague of Rhondeag and we were wondering how this page warranted deletion under R3. Please could you provide us wih your reasons for deleting the page under R3. This would be much appreciated.

Pmc08 (talk) 08:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

My reason was implausible redirect as no one would likely be searching for that long string. However the more important reason was that, before the article was redirected, it contained some rather obvious copyright problems. It seems user:Rhondeag was completely unresponsive to questions about that article, the "Bedrock Geology UK" article or various image concerns. You and Rhondeag like me are anonymous users and Wikipedia cannot take anonymous comments/claims about serious issues without further backup as user:Peridon has pointed out to you. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 10:04, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, I have the BGS book ordered and will double check when it arrives - should be later this week depending on mail service. Vsmith (talk) 10:15, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Geosyncline

See Wikipedia:Parenthetical referencing. Hyacinth (talk) 23:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Seen that already ... bah. Vsmith (talk) 00:38, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Ghosttowns link

Hello. I don't think the ghost towns link is spam. The guy is not selling anything and nothing on his site links to any seller. Other than a page that says who he is, the site is not a personal web page. With these factors in mind, the site is not WP:ELNO. Your thoughts? (I'll look for them here.) --S. Rich (talk) 03:00, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

When a user adds dozens of links to a website - and that was the only contributions of that user - that is spam. I looked at the first one that showed up on my watchlist and the text appeared to be copied from the Wikipedia article (or was it the other way around? didn't think so). Seems it was the Gleeson article. The only "new" stuff was a batch of photos. He is welcome to add new content w/ reliable sources or to upload good images to commons. Vsmith (talk) 09:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I can't find any policy or guideline that describes what you are suggesting, e.g., that adding links to dozens of different articles constitutes spamming. For example, I've been improving references by adding dozens of {{OCLC|1234567}} templates to references which link to the WorldCat. Am I spamming? (At the same time, we have a {{ASIN|7654321}} template to link to Amazon -- if there wasn't ISBN, OCLC, LCC, or LCCN data for a particular item, would it be spamming to include the ASIN?)

In DA's case, he has cited and linked WP as the source when giving info about the locations. (By comparison, some of those ghost town EL pages have no source data whatsoever.) His data about Eagle Mountain, California is accurate (I've been there and live in Riverside County) and he's providing roughly 42 photos per location, which load up quickly. He has absolutely no ads, which is not the case with some of the other sites we see on these obscure ghost town pages.

If any of the various WP pages have linkfarms, then those EL sections should be culled; but his additions are not cluttering the EL section. (I went to the Gleeson page and cleaned out a couple of the ELs with ads and readded DA's link.)

None of the WP:ELNO criteria apply. The photos are high quality and because they are taken at the scene he qualifies as a "knowledgeable source" IAW WP:ELMAYBE #4. Indeed, his pages fit well in the 3 "What to include" criteria. His contributions are worthwhile and should be included. --S. Rich (talk) 15:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Quite simply, if a user only adds links to a site of his to a couple dozen wp articles - that qualifies as spam. We don't use Wikipedia to promote our own stuff. The user is more than welcome to add content to wp articles or images, but not to use wp for promotion of his web pages. WP:other stuff exists is no excuse. Vsmith (talk) 16:42, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

This is interesting. If I had come across his website and then added links to the various articles, the additions would not be spam. But you're saying because DA has done so, the material is spam. The distinction, which is not addressed in the guidelines, is in who adds the links and not in what the link is.

In this particular case, the real problem is in whether DA is promoting himself. But, again, there a distinction. DA is treading towards the realm of WP:PROMOTION, but the promotion is not so much for himself, but in the particular interest he has -- e.g., obscure places in the desert. In other words, he's really not promoting himself. (And, yet again, it would certainly be proper for a non-related editor such as myself to add the links.)

Sadly, though, DA has created a sockpuppet. OrangeMike blocked User:Ghosttownaz for "spamming" in June. If our newbie had appealed the block, pointing out (quite correctly) that none of his links were for commercial purposes, this might be different.--S. Rich (talk) 17:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Bottom line: we're here to build an encyclopedia. A user whose only interest is in adding external links is not here to build an encyclopedia. Thanks for the note re: the sockpuppetry, adds another dimension. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 21:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I think you're being unfair. He has an interest in documenting the disappearing human activity in AZ, etc. and has set up a non-commercial website for all to access. It is not a promotion of himself or something other than a bit history. In this regard he has more than an "only interest". He'd like his contributions to be recognized and available, only he's gone about it in the wrong manner.The result: the links were hastily labeled as spam.

Also, I think you rushed to judgment with the very first reversion of his added link. I say this because the edit summary said "spam" from the get-go, when the EL was not selling anything either on its own or through annoying flashing ads. (I recognize that you may have done a "who is linking" vice "what is being linked" analysis before you started reverting his edits. Still, if this is the case, then I wish I could find guidance that supports that position. Again, if I had come across the links and put them in they'd be fine. Don't you agree?)--S. Rich (talk) 02:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... just looked at the Gleeson link again. What I find is a history basically copied from WP with a couple comments added. Then there are 42 photos most with no identifying notes - just bare images w/ a copyright note embedded. Tell me how that page is worth linking to again, as I'm not seeing it. So, no that one at least wouldn't "be fine". The Oorah bit wasn't around back in the 60s - so means nothing to me, we had our own gung-ho phrases. Vsmith (talk) 12:00, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe, like me, you don't remember. But the article gave an interesting origin of the phrase back to the 50's. Still, as an Army guy, I must boast that our battle cry has an earlier origin. I was attending a conference (or some other such nonsense) at the JFK Special Warfare Center a few years/decades ago. We had a fellow talking about the Rangers, and he said he had landed with them on Omaha Beach (a rather nasty bit of real estate). He told us how some general came up to the one of the Ranger NCOs. The whole invasion force was pinned down on the beach by machine gunners firing from above. The general ordered the Rangers to get up those cliffs and knock out the German pill boxes. The NCO responded: "Who – us?!" --S. Rich (talk) 05:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

IP problem

Can you please take a look at this IP? They've been edit warring and vandalizing. Thanks. INeverCry 01:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Thx for that. Another 200 edit user has reverted you on 2012–13 UEFA Champions League group stage, the same way the IP was doing. I don't know the story with this ref-switching. INeverCry 01:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

• • That isn't vandalism. I've already left a note on INeveryCry's talk page, but those edits are not vandalism as they are changing primary links to secondary ones, which is clearly not vandalism. They did a lot of reverting and such, but that is a different issue and I'm a bit disturbed at the inappropriate template bombing on the edit's talk page by an experienced editor who should know better. There is an unblock request on the IPs talk page, started by Sven, and I would ask that Vsmith just take a look again at the block, as I think it might be in error. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Commented on ip talk. Vsmith (talk) 00:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

What confused me was the block log and lack of block template, so it was kind of impossible to tell why you made the block. Now that you have explained it, it makes sense and it was a judgement call, but the improper vandal templates threw me. I don't think he likes that I pointed out the templates, but the edits were not vandalism. His methods, however, were less than optimal. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll agree the anonblock template was inadequate and I should have done a better job of explaining at the time. My glitch and apologies for the confusion it caused. Vsmith (talk) 01:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for pulling you into this mess I seem to have made. INeverCry 01:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Repin

Dear Dr. Vsmith!

I am geologist with backgraund from 1973 (I worked as a little specialist when was a student of MSU in some "wild" territories ).

https://plus.google.com/113608956654143996274/about

If You can know anything about SALARS - You can look site of USGS.

If You have any gadgat in Your pocket - You have some piece Lithium. This metal is the base of modern batteries, accumulaters and etc. SALARS - the first source of Lithium. And KCl - one of the main fertilizers, and many potashes, and very many useful things.

So, I think, that WIKI readers have any rights to know, what is the base of the phones, electricity cars ann many other interesting things.

Regards,

aleksey g.repin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksey g.repin (talk • contribs) 08:55, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Wiki readers have a right to know. That is why we write articles. However, we don't promote our own work with external links. Write content for the Russian Wiki based on reliable sources and perhaps we can translate and add to en.wiki. Vsmith (talk) 11:26, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Striped flint

All right, I added scientific sources for opal and Neolithic usage. I will try to add sources to the uniqueness of Polish striped flint, if it indeed is so unique. I based on the internet sources claiming it is unique for Poland, however now I see, some forms of striped flint can be found in many places around the world. Please, give me a week. Olaf (talk) 10:26, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

There is no rush, thanks for adding refs and for leaving me this note. Vsmith (talk) 11:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I improved the article. I hope it's quite good now. Olaf (talk) 23:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Can you please block this IP, another one of blocked user Zrdragon's many sockpuppets? Thanks,TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 23:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and this one?TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Fish question

Hi VSmith, i have a question regarding Pacific vs. Atlantic Ocean seafood. I know this is random and user pages are for article-related thingys, but it's a burning curiosity in me. Throughout my life, I ate seafood caught from the Pacific Ocean and from it's connecting water bodies, like sardines, mackerel, shrimp and other shellfish, salmon etc from Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan etc., and the seafood i ate from these areas had a typical (smelly) seafood smell/odor, although it wasn't very pungent. However, when I compared the same seafood i ate originating from the Pacific with the same ones originally caught from the Atlantic, e.g. from eastern North America, north Europe, the Atlantic seafood had a much more strong, very pronounced, seafood odor/smell. For example, frozen and canned sardines from Thailand and Vietnam had a much less pungent seafood odor than the same canned and frozen sardines from New Brunswick, Canada and Portugal. Why is this the case?? Nguyen1310 (talk) 01:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't the foggiest idea. Processing perhaps? Vsmith (talk) 01:56, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Maybe, but prob not because they freeze the seafood the same way, canning prob the same, but even the fresh ones smell strongly... Nguyen1310 (talk) 18:56, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind me butting in, but I fish a lot and possibly might have some ideas, (although I have no real definitive answer). Most likely it has to do partly with chemistry and partly with perception. Although connected, the different oceans are different bodies of water with different chemical compositions, different food sources, and different environments. This is very likely to cause fish to smell differently. Which one is smellier, however, is usually more of a matter of perception. Growing up on Pacific fish myself, I also have noticed that Atlantic fish tastes weird, but a friend of mine who grew up in New England says that our Pacific fish tastes weird to him. Zaereth (talk) 19:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

coriolis

Yes, I have the exact reference to VI Arnold, and the illustration, however (as it appeared) on another computer, so it might day a day or two to transfer the files. Sinc. Leon00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.24.130 (talk) 12:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Azomite citations

Hey there, V Smith.

I found and added your recommended citations. Reference #4 was intended for the whole section but have clarified. My intention was not to confuse. Also thank you - if you are the user that added the nifty mouse-overs to the citations. That was next on the list. Will hopefully have time to add more points of interest soon.

Cheers Victoriasays (talk) 23:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Clarifying and adding references is good. I can't claim any "credit" for the mouse over bit as that's a feature of Wiki - maybe you modified your "preference file" to allow it?

Could you please address the points I raised on the article talk, specifically the "rare earth" stuff and the rather obvious promotional tone of the article, we don't write articles to advertise products for companies. Vsmith (talk) 00:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Dude, it was an accident. I was in the process of figuring out to restore it. Victoriasays (talk) 02:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hello - the IP at the following: User talk:68.188.38.198 is at a school (and I am a teacher here.) Is there a way you can permanently or at least semi-permanently block it? This way the students here won't be able to edit without a login. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.38.198 (talk) 14:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Done. Vsmith (talk) 15:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Mélange page

Hi, there's a subsection that somebody has added to the mélange geology article covering a band. It's entirely out-of-place, could you please revert the article? Thanks, Colin J. (NZ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.23.26 (talk) 06:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted those additions, although you don't need any special privileges to be able to do that. Mikenorton (talk) 07:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Mike. Looks like I sorta missed something there - thought I'd done that. Hmm... Vsmith (talk) 13:20, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

C. Richard Tracy

Hi, I noticed that you deleted a list of students that was placed on the page years ago. May I ask why? thanks, BigDogRufus — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigDogRufus (talk • contribs) 19:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I could see no point in a plain list of names with no WP:reliable sources nor any indication of notability. Vsmith (talk) 20:45, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Coordinated sock attack

Hello, what happened now at these articles:Mount Hermon, List of mountains, List of caves, Gush Hispin, National parks and nature reserves of Israel, Mishor Adumim, Tourism in Israel, and all the East Jerusalem settlements attacked by this IP on 31 October here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/80.179.118.129

is a coordinated sock attack, this has happened before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive733#Coordinated_attacks_by_socks

Its basically many different IPs and "new" accounts going back to different places showing up at the exact same time and starting to pov push and edit war.

This IP:[4] for example is a confirmed proxy server: http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip/67.142.164.21

I kindly ask that you please revert all these edits and lock the articles. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 02:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

G'mornin ... sleep is good. Maybe ANI. Look around a bit later, need caffeine now. Vsmith (talk) 10:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

link for isbn numbers

Thanks for straightening me out on a sales link at Old Faithful Inn. I wasn't trying to be crassly commercial but I think it's useful for readers to have some pathway to finding the source. With printed books, that's not hard. But with ebooks, what to do? The link I added is for a book available only on the iTunes store; nowhere else. For some reason, a google search for the isbn doesn't find it, which might be an issue to take up with the iTunes store.

For that matter, Wiki's isbn search page book sources lacks a link for the iTunes store among the other booksellers. Would that be the right place on Wiki to create a pathway?

I value guidance. Meanwhile, I'll go back to the sandbox for more practice.

tks — Preceding unsigned comment added by BluffTaylor (talk • contribs) 04:10, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

An e-book without a valid isbn would seem questionable and perhaps a self-published piece which would fail WP:RS. If is is only available at a commercial sales site - that's even worse and a link to it would be inappropriate. I wasn't aware that itunes had anything other than music, and if their "books" lack valid isbns I'd be wary of linking - we don't promote self-published stuff. Vsmith (talk) 10:14, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Global warming controversy". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you!

Guide for participants If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form. What this noticeboard is: It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction. What this noticeboard is not: It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct. It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums. It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN. It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy. Things to remember: Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion. Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page. Sign and date your posts with four tildes "~~~~". If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage. EarwigBot operator / talk 00:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC) Notice Hello, I'm Cole132132. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! The reason for this being the refernces were directly stated for co2 gaps as well as tempertature changes a compleatly relavent subject. I suggest instead of blatently delting other peoples work because of your own political opinions (which is the only thing assumable) that you overlook things properly, as well as participate in the Dispute Noticeboad.-- Cole132132 (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC) Talkback Hello, Vsmith. You have new messages at Plurofuturo's talk page. Message added 09:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. I think I've cleared things up - they explained the apparent COI (and it looks like it's not one), and they're now in compliance with WP:NOSHARE. Thanks for calling them on that.  — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 09:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks for your assistance and translating there - looks like Plurofuturo is on the way to understanding and hopefully constructive editing. Vsmith (talk) 13:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC) MRS GREN I added the "MRS GREN" section to the Life article because a new user had created a new article of that title with no sources at all, and with the simple definition. Rather than leave such a poor article in place, I created a section at the Life article for this new article to redirect to. Based on the number of hits the phrase receives on Google, it seems a likely search term, especially for younger Wikipedia readers. The sources I gave are reliable in that they show that the term is a commonly used acronym used in elementary pedagogy, which was the point of the references. I would hardly go to those sources to learn meaningful science, but sources that might otherwise be considered unreliable can be considered reliable in the right context. Would you prefer the information sourced from the BBC? Or from an Australian climate change website? Or from TES, a British teachers' network? WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC) JSTOR Hi there. You're one of the first 100 people to sign up for a free JSTOR account via the requests page. We're ready to start handing out accounts, if you'd still like one. JSTOR will provide you access via an email invitation, so to get your account, please email me (swallingwikimedia.org) with... the subject line "JSTOR" your English Wikipedia username your preferred email address for a JSTOR account The above information will be given to JSTOR to provide you with your account, but will otherwise remain private. Please do so by November 30th or drop me a message to say you don't want/need an account any longer. If you don't meet that deadline, we will assume you have lost interest, and will provide an account to the next person in the rather long waitlist. Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Email sent, thanks, Vsmith (talk) 02:31, 21 November 2012 (UTC) What happened to the paleogeography images?? I noticed you recently made an edit to the Jurassic article. Those paleo maps existed for such a long time in all those articles and now all of a sudden they were removed? What happened? Did they suddenly become non-fair use? Those images fit so great in all the period articles, it would be a shame if they were all taken out :( I'm wondering if you know what happened to them. Cadiomals (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC) Good morning. Seems there been a bit of a flap over at commons about these - don't know all the details. See [5] and [6] for some of the discussion. Vsmith (talk) 13:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC) Need protection on Michael Crichton Protection barely expired on Michael Crichton and we've already been hit with two IPs repeating the edit warring that caused it in the first place. We made need permanent protection. Glaucus (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC) Sleep and busy took over earlier, but it seems quiet now - the article is on my watchlist. Vsmith (talk) 22:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC) SILVER SOL Take it to the article talk page The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. hello, could you please not delete my edit? If you feel its not neutral or its promotional kindly edit it to be neutral. I personally don't see it this way, on the page of every approved medicine by the fda there is a mention of the name of the company which developed it. See for example prozac or tadalafil. This gel isn't alternative medicine, it is a mainstream drug, just as any other drug. It can be prescribed by normal doctors. Its fda approved. 70.39.186.229 (talk) 08:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)ryanspir Find some independent sources which discuss or review the product. Commercial websites, patent aps and FDA "letters" won't do it. And... who are you? Please log in. Vsmith (talk) 11:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC) FDA is an independent source. It's not FDA "letters". It's FDA official approval. I'm Ryanspir and I'm not a part of that company and has nothing to do with colloidal silver. I just want the information provided on this page to be unbiased and updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir (talk • contribs) 15:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Promotion Hello, I'm not promoting commercial product. I didn't write for example that it cures all or anything. 1. I think you are mistaken. Any FDA approved drug may and should have info about it on wikipedia. Please look prozac or cialis articles for example. They do contain info about the manufacturer. I don't see any reason why FDA approved drugs containing colloidal silver product should be treated differently. I did provide a link to their website, because meanwhile this company has no entry in wikipedia. However, once the entry will be created I'll change the link. 2. "Silver is also promoted within alternative medicine in the form of colloidal silver, although it has not been shown to be safe or effective.[1]" This is what is written in the lead. This became absolutely false and misleading all the readers from the year of 2009 when FDA approved this form of colloidal silver. *It is a regular drug now, which can and is prescribed by the doctor. Do you agree with me? Because the fact of FDA approval makes it impossible to consider this variant of colloidal silver as not safe or as not effective. Are we together? 3. The whole article about colloidal silver is written in very bad, biased and in negative way. Why wouldn't you fix that? Looking at the talk page it's not only me who holds this opinion. Its currently written in a way, that shows that colloidal silver is mainly quackery and it may turn you blue and create side-effects. Did you ever hear that FDA will approve quackery drugs? Did you ever hear that EPA will approve quackery agents and allow them to be used by hospitals in the US? This article should be edited in the light of FDA approval of colloidal silver in 2009. We know also that FDA is not a fan of approving colloidal silver, it took years for it to be approved. So we can easily deduct that the company have provided enough scientific evidence to FDA supporting it's claims. 4. I have just listed the facts in my edit and I was very brief. Saying for example that this is the first colloidal silver approved by FDA is not a promotion, it's a fact. Listing of the patents, besides including additional info for the interested user also shows that silver sol is a variation of colloidal silver. 5. "In August 1999, the FDA banned colloidal silver sellers from claiming any therapeutic or preventive value for the product..". As you see, HERE you are satisfied that if FDA said so, no additional independent sources are needed in order to state that fact on wikipedia. So, in 2009 FDA has reversed it's position by granting its approval. It's obvious that the cited information is wrong now and outdated from 2009 and till this moment. 6. Etc, etc, etc. There is so many things that are currently wrong in the article and I can talk for ages. So I was a bit shocked that you have reversed my edit which contains updated factual information while at the same time you do allow all the wrong and well outdated info to stay on the page. Most of the cited negative publications were written well prior to 2009. But the medical community is advancing, new forms of colloidal silvers being developed which wikipedia should reflect. If you are not satisfied with the link to their website or to the EPA approval, or you find any sentence which looks to you promotional, please change/edit that particular link or sentence, but do not delete the whole section.* If you would like me anything to change or add, please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir (talk • contribs) 15:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Seems you are mixing things up a bit. A product used as an external ointment is of course not going to have the same treatment as one used internally. But this all belongs on the article talk page. The inclusion of information about some new medication simply needs some WP:reliable sources that are independent of the product and not just patent and FDA memos or whatever. Write a solid well referenced article about this product independent of the "colloidal silver" nonsense and then perhaps add mention in the medical uses of silver page. Your other concerns regarding the article and "colloidal silver" stuff needs to be discussed on the talk there independently of your "new product" article or article addition. Vsmith (talk) 15:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Colloidal silver nonsense Haha :-). I caught you red handed. When you say colloidal silver nonsense it shows that you are personally biased regarding the subject. As a result of this the article contains wrong info and doesn't contain the right info. I suggest you inhibit yourself from watchlisting this article. Alternatively, lets elevate it further. The link i provided is not fda memo. Its the official fda approval. Any drug as long as its fda approved has the right to be listed as a drug on the wikipedia, it doesn't matter if its for internal or external use. Interestingly enough, when it was said previously that fda warns about using cs, now that was simple a letter and yet you allowed this statement to exist on the page. You are using double standards. :) also, about us patent, do you think they have no verification process? Anyone can create a snake oil for treating humans and they will issue a patent for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.173 (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC) (talk page stalker) Well, they have issued patents for perpetual motion machines. Chris857 (talk) 19:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Bias and double standarts i'm sure that if i would add additional warnings around the sections and cite fda letters or memos, you wouldn't object. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.209 (talk) 19:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Take it to the article talk page and sign in please. Vsmith (talk) 20:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC) To talkstalker Haha :). The link you have provided is for international patents and indeed it mentions some hits for perpetual motion. However same search on US Patent site didn't show any hits. Probably some countries have less stringent rules for inclusion. So sorry, but even on this side point no win :). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.186.173 (talk) 22:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Read further - only the first was French. Vsmith (talk) 22:25, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Wp:medrs i hope i'm signed now. Lets look at subject. It says: statements from nation or internation recognized expert bodies. So, will you contradict that fda is such a body? Or you contradict the fact that the link which i provided clearly allows the company to distribute the cs gel in us and it also specifies the indications as it is done by fda for any drug? Isn't that link even if it would be a memo or a letter doesn't show the position of fda regarding the product? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir (talk • contribs) 22:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Good, you've logged in -- now you need to learn to sign your talk comments. To do that, just type four tildes at the end ( ~~~~ ) and Wiki software replaces that with your username and timestamp. As for WP:MEDRS, seems another user referred you to that, altho I agree. FDA documents can be used, but are not sufficient. Need further 3rd party references. And, take it to the article talk please as I'm not the only editor involved. Vsmith (talk) 22:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Patents for talk stalker hehe :). I cannot see any approved patent for perpetual motion. It seems that the link you provided also lists simply submitted and not approved patents. :) i'm still winning on this point unless you can provide seven digit number for an approved us patent for perpetual motion in the last ten years. :) 70.39.186.237 (talk) 08:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Ryanspir Please read this http://lifesilver.com/testimony.htm This link contains u.S congressional report about silver sol. As they state a copy of this can be found at library of congress. An additional resource is http://silversol.soundconcepts.com/faqs.aspx as of special interest for you read statement of surgeon general of us airforce pk carlton md who recommends it being used in military and the protection of the civilians. Sorry cannot sign, some issue in my mobile phone, ryanspir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanspir (talk • contribs) 09:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC) please let me know if you have read the provided information. If you will think logically, think like that: if cs is a snake oil, or not effective, or has harmful side effects, or has got anything else bad at all, why would a doctor who is surgeon general of us airforce recommend its usage? First of all, he knows that military will conduct super stringent tests before accepting it. So he must be pretty sure it will pass all tests otherwise he would have discredited himself. Why would he even risk this scenario being a military doctor? The most logical reason is that he was convinced by the produced studies, saw efficiency and absence of side-effects. ryanspir — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.144.184.147 (talk) 20:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Opinions Neutral opinions Please read this Washington Post opinion: A good deal for the District and Puerto Rico Please read The New York Times Opinion: Will Puerto Rico Be America’s 51st State? Please read the Boston Herald Opinion: Puerto Rican statehood By Boston Herald Editorial Staff