User talk:Materialscientist

Please leave your message at the bottom of this page, for example, by clicking "new section" at the top. I shall reply wherever you prefer (my usual habit is to reply here if the answer is short). If I replied on your talk page, it means I am watching it, and there is no need to add the {{talkback}} template or quote the previous message.

unlock Jenni Rivera

Hello. You locked Jenni Rivera on January 19. It will be 2 months next week. Please unlock it. It was probably getting alot of edits because she tragically died Dec 9. I think the interest has died down considerably. I'd like to edit her page to add her siblings names, her various business(wedding rings, jeans, perfumes,), and more info I read in her autobiography Unbreakable Thanks. 71.191.244.33 (talk) 08:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank You. 71.191.244.33 (talk) 16:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Mauritania

Hello,

please take the time to read my edits about Mauritania and note that all my claims are backed by easily verifiable sources. It is frustrating that my changes keep being undone by admins who don't know a thing about my country and insist on perpetuating a page full of lies and distortions. I am more than happy to elaborate but please help me correct some of the facts on this page

Respectfully,

Rimman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rimman (talk • contribs) 00:36, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

title name of Manjari Babu to be changed to Manjari

I am manjari (playback singer) from india....the wikipedia site on me is with title Manjari Babu (Babu is my father's name) which i want to change to Manjari.

Pl advise what to do

(Materialscientist, pl advise...if required i can provide the credentials...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkvkkv (talk • contribs) 05:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

regards, Manjari --Kkvkkv (talk) 07:01, 14 March 2013 (UTC) --Kkvkkv (talk) 05:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Rossrocker09 and Gtwfan52's userpage

I am Tyler....Or whiskerzman as u may know me....i feel there has been a mistake...it did turn red! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whiskerzman (talk • contribs) 21:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

On March 1st, User:Rossrocker09 edited User:Gtwfan52 here and twice edited User talk:Gtwfan52 here and here, after editing the user page once in February. This was all after Gtwfan52 reverted an edit he made and civilly conversed on the He was later blocked in part due to abuse of multiple accounts. Yesterday (earlier today in UTC), an IP trolled, it seems (I originally called it vandalism), the same page here. On my talk page, Gtwfan52 expressed concern that the IP is a sock, stating "the same person has made a remark like that on my user page" before, most likely a reference to Rossrocker09. Assuming this is true (which seems reasonable especially since that edit is the only one by that IP Special:Contribs/99.23.188.26), I'd like to know what action should be taken, should it happen again. Regards, Greengreengreenred 13:03, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Provisional reply (I don't see a full picture): wait for more IPs and list them somewhere if many - maybe we can rangeblock the IPs. If not, and the editing frequency is high, then semiprotection of the target pages. Otherwise we'll just keep reverting and blocking individual IPs. Materialscientist (talk) 13:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Greengreengreenred 23:19, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

SPI

Hi, please see Walther WA 2000 and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Lbrad2001. This user is edit warring across multiple accounts/IPs. ROG5728 (talk) 17:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Caption Request

Hello MS, would you be so kind as to visit the "Talk Cloud" page, and answer a question I posted there yesterday about the types of clouds in a photo. ThanksPocketthis (talk) 00:43, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for improving the Monsanto article! So much work! Jytdog (talk) 14:07, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Saveourshorter.com

Saveourshorter.com is not a reliable source of information to cite for the article on Shorter University. It is an anonymous Wordpress blog created by a politically motivated group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.93.33.10 (talk) 18:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Cvictor34 again

This user is very likely him. Flyer22 (talk) 00:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Copernicium vs. cyclopentadien

I did your google book search, and there is exactly one book that references the Cp discussion, and it does not have a primary reference. All others are links to wikipedia, or reference wikipedia. Chemists would not be confused by the overlap, and and there are no IUPAC rules that would disallow overloading letters like that. In fact, there are multiple overlaps of this sort in the chemical literature. I just think we should stick to verifiable facts, and not make things up because it makes a good story.

Sorry to be insistent on this, but it's something that can be easily cleaned up if you'd stop deleting the edits, or reference your source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.67.60 (talk) 04:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand. Google books search for cyclopentadienyl Cp returns 30k+ hits [1]. Materialscientist (talk) 05:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Right, but that isn't why Copernicium could not be abbreviated Cp. The IUPAC naming rules are different for ligands and elements, and the abbreviations are allowe to overlap. Do your search with Ar and aromatic to prove that to yourself. But Argon is still abbreviated Ar, without confusion. It is known that cyclopentadienyl ligands are abbreviated Cp, that is a fact. But Copernicium could not be named Cp because Cp was used as an abbreviation for a different element, one that turned out not to really exist. The paragraph in question is right, If the sentence about Cp ligands is removed, like I tried to do originally. The sentence about Cp ligands is false, and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.67.60 (talk) 20:50, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see your point now. I have removed that sentence. Materialscientist (talk) 06:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

@71.198.67.60: Cp the element actually exists. It's just called Lu nowadays. :-) Double sharp (talk) 04:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

@Materialscientist: This is making me think. Since it seems that cyclopentadienyl was not a factor, that means that cassiopeium was the only reason for the rejection of Cp as a symbol for copernicium, right? So why was Fl approved for flerovium? It used to be an alternative symbol for fluorine. Cn was also a symbol for carolinium (which doesn't actually exist, but it's still a historical usage). Also it would make more sense to check for collisions with current usage rather than historical usage. Do they have a written policy on this? Double sharp (talk) 16:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I know nothing about naming considerations - user:Stone might help, though he's been busy recently. I guess IUPAC evaluates the notability of past claims on a certain symbol (i.e. when a symbol can be considered as "taken"). Materialscientist (talk) 00:37, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Bottlenose dolphins images

Hi! Two days ago I've added two underwater images to bottlenose dolphins, but you've reverted my contribution with the reason "unclear value and purpose". The purpose of adding those images was to show a dolphin and pod of dolphins in there natural habitat, i.e. underwater. Dolphins live underwater, but 9 out of 10 images of the article shows them above the water (there is only one low-quality underwater image). Also most of the existing images shows only the head of a dolphin and there are no images of dolphins pods. Alex Vasenin (talk) 12:09, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Filipino vandal

Our Filipino vandal friend is back, now as jajadeleradesign. See this nonsense edit for instance. I also filed over at the sockpuppet investigation.  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Wow, he was blocked as I typed. Disregard!  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

bevin boys

my source for the edit was george raymond thorne bevin boy 1945-1948 they had to buy their own boots and if they lost/damaged the helmet they had to buy another he still has the receipt for his boots and a bill for a damaged helmet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lagernaut (talk • contribs) 16:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Mahabalipuram monuments project

Can you please help us to move the articles under this User:Rosiestep/sandbox/Mahabalipuram monuments project to the main pages. They are under five heads of Main, Rathas, Mandapas, Cutstone temple and Rock relief. Some are to be moved to the existing articles and some are new. In all, there are 16 articles. Thank you--Nvvchar. 16:57, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Moved a half, will continue after about an hour. Please check refs 8/9 in Cave Temples of Mahabalipuram (and relevant articles) - is it the same or different sources? (same ISBN, different authors). Materialscientist (talk) 01:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

You have always been very helpful and positive. Thank you very much. I will attend to whatever isues you have indicated during tidying.--Nvvchar. 16:12, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

michelle leigh mccool

she got married to mark calaway on june 26, 2010, thus making her last name calaway — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.250.69.165 (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Sega Genesis edit warrior

Immediately after coming off of the block, User:82.41.107.134 has continued to attempt to force his changes on the article. Seeing as you're the original blocking admin, though you might want to know. As an aside, it looks like the fair IP wants to be disruptive in other places as well. --Izno (talk) 23:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

121.54.44.128/26

Hi Materialscientist, I see that you made a hardblock to 121.54.44.128/26. Please consult with a CheckUser before making such blocks. I do see on the SPI that you could have mistaken DoRD's comment as saying it was ok to make block, but being effective does not mean that there is no collateral. Could you please ask directly about hardblocking a certain range next time please? Serveral other users were blocked as a result of this rangeblock, one who requested an unblock and got an IPBE. Thanks, -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:21, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Ugh, thanks. I do not hardblock IP ranges, and made this exception only because of the SPI comment (I figured that the person from that SPI was registering accounts from a third IP and then editing by those multiple accounts from 121.54.44.128/26). I also hoped that the range is too narrow for a significant collateral damage. Materialscientist (talk) 01:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I apologize if my comment wasn't clear. What I meant was that your original block would have been effective except for the other (now blocked) IP they were using to create accounts. On the bright side, it doesn't look like they've created any new accounts since my previous check. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:19, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Fred Couples

That's ridiculous. That whole article is unsourced, and as far as the change I made goes, all you have to do is Google the nickname to see it's common knowledge. In fact, it's actually mentioned lower in the article - I just made it more prominent.

Rubbish reversion, try using some common sense next time.

Editation of Indonesia

Just want to please you to edit Indonesia article. I want to add the nicknames of Indonesia, they are Nusantara and Permata Khatulistiwa/Equatorial Diamond. The article only editable for autoconfirmed users, and I'm not one of it. Please add the nicknames. Thanks before, Andrean182 (talk) 06:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

User:LePatro

You posted on this user's talk page in February about his campaign to change pretty much every reference to Hejaz to Tihama in a raft of articles. He's continued to do it despite being asked to stop by several users. I've just caught up with this - and he's causing quite a mess. Is there anything as an admin you could do? Someone did take him to ANI (not me) but nothing seems to have come from it.DeCausa (talk) 12:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Materialscientist, I will be celebrating my birthday on 19 March. So, I would like to give you a treat. If you decide to "eat" the cookie, please reply by placing {{subst:munch}} on my talk page. I hope this cookie has made your day better. Cheers! Arctic Kangaroo 14:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

BloodRayne 2 protection

Your experiment with unprotection there appears to be failing. Could you re-instate it? DMacks (talk) 01:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I had reservations about this unprotection, but decided to give it a try. Let us wait a bit more (most vandalism came from one blocked IP), and then I will reprotect. Materialscientist (talk) 01:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Block Sock

Can you please block [[2]] this has been open a few days now. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 03:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

What is your evidence? I've briefly looked through your comment [3] and past edits and I don't see it right away. Materialscientist (talk) 04:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC).

If you look in the archive, there are username similarities (Triple05 being the last) , the additions being made have been all in the same area tallest buildings or shopping centers in Phillipines, has been socking since at least December [[4]] also he is repeatedly recreating a previously deleted material via afd [[5]]. There is a ton of history here. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

This should help context [[6]] if you look at all the deletions and small variations. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:51, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Blocked. Thin evidence though. Materialscientist (talk) 05:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Photon

Hi! You deleted my illustration for the Photon. Do you find the image inaccurate? I wanted to show frequency and wavelength which I did not find depicted visually anywhere. The illustration was also a good visualization (in my opinion) of how the photon was a wave. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Illusterati (talk • contribs) 05:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

---

I have improved the image for clarity http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Photon.png

What constitutes a valid reference? It is published on illusterati.com which I plan to grow to a site containing more such illustrations of concepts. Does illusterati.com constitute a valid reference? I have already added illusterati.com as the source in wikimedia commons.

This is not original research. If I drew a picture of a hammer and called it a hammer, would that be original research? :-)

This depiction is based on our current understanding of waves and the photon.

I searched the internet far and wide to find one good depiction of a photon which shows wavelength and frequency concepts clearly and did not find any, so I created it myself. You can see for yourself: https://www.google.com.sg/search?q=photon&hl=en&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.43828540,d.bmk&biw=2133&bih=1040&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=PrNGUaq0G4rIrQetpYHQBg#um=1&hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=photon&oq=photon&gs_l=img.12...0.0.0.2898803.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.0...1c..6.img.NfjuhiSMCIw&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.43828540,d.bmk&fp=77bb85b0a3a82bef&biw=2133&bih=1040

I only wish to improve wikipedia and create content which authors can use royalty free in their textbooks or websites. Let me know if this satisfies you. If it does, then I will re-post.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Illusterati (talk • contribs) 08:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

(i) See WP:NOR. We may not add what we think we know. Instead, we should summarize content from reliable, preferably secondary, sources. This also applies to such images. (ii) To me, this is not a photon, but a wave, chopped at two ends. (iii) There is still a credit to your website in it. Materialscientist (talk) 08:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

This is a content dispute, rather unrelated to Materialscientist because he is one of two users who reverted Illusterati. Why you discuss this in user_talk, not at talk: Photon? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:04, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Mössbauer spectroscopy

Hello, could you please explain why my change did not pass your check? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmossinfo (talk • contribs) 19:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

EU has the largest nominal GDP in the world

EU has the largest GDP as political being in the world .Check IMF gdps lists.Or invent them otherwise)))) You in Wikiamerica...sorry Wikipedia are really creative))))Upon EU only WORLD))))Mediolanum (talk) 20:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Problems with a user

Hello. I have problem with a user that creates articles that already exists (Sicilian people) and gives personal interpretations to different social phenomenas (Sicilian nationalism‎). Please may you help me, because there is a clear edit war. The user is Sadistik. Thanks in advance. --Walter J. Rotelmayer (talk) 22:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Black hole

Materialscientist, I'd like your opinion as an experienced administrator. I fielded a request to lower the protection level on Black hole to PC, and I decided that I'd try unprotecting it since it had been more than 3 years since it was protected. And already the vandalism has started. Do you think my decision was appropriate, or should I have been more concerned about the history? RockMagnetist (talk) 05:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

In short, this was a matter of personal judgement, and I would do the same because of the short protection history, with the last protection 3+ years ago. Setting pending changes has numerous subtle pros and cons, but I do not see a reason for any protection. It will take a few months to clarify the situation. Regards. PS Don't hesitate to ask - I did that a lot, and learned a lot, after passing my RFA :-). Materialscientist (talk) 06:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad to know you feel that way, because the reverts have fallen to you so far. I have put it on my watchlist, though. Thanks! RockMagnetist (talk) 14:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Your recent warnings.

Just thought I'd let you know that you seem to be forgetting to add a section for the month for some of your recent warnings. AnthonyJ Lock (talk) 10:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Forgot to mention that I fixed them up for you. AnthonyJ Lock (talk) 10:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I often don't do that for the first one, because the chances are high that IP won't edit much. I also don't add it for users - they'll usually get blocked after several warnings. Materialscientist (talk) 10:35, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Correct me if i'm wrong but if you warn a user without creating a section for the month and for example Cluebot then has to revert one of the users edits it will default to warning level 1 and create a new section. AnthonyJ Lock (talk) 10:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't know how warning levels are currently set up in ClueBot NG (talk · contribs), but experience tells you're wrong - see User_talk:217.177.92.37 for example. Materialscientist (talk) 10:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmm quite odd, well anyway I just figured I'd just double check to see if you were just accidentally forgetting them or not. AnthonyJ Lock (talk) 10:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Cluebot has a fairly short (just a few days) memory effect before re-starting at level 1, and "starting at level 1" always involves month-header. Technically, the bot's level-1 warning includes the header (rather than "create section and then add warning), so it isn't actually looking for an existing section for current month at all. It's broken behavior, many editors have complained about it for years, and the bot-wrangler refuses to even acknowledge that the restart-timeout might be too short or that month-header duplications are a problem (just "well yeah, that's how the bot is", was the impression I got). DMacks (talk) 11:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

(another TPS) I love ClueBot passionately, but this is an issue that has bothered me for a long time. It's not uncommon to encounter a user talk page with five, six or even more warnings in the same month, and I think it's absurd that this can't be corrected. If that bot's operator(s) won't fix it, surely vandalism should be enough of a concern for the WMF to devote some developer hours to devising either a fix or a replacement. Rivertorch (talk) 17:54, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Birth/deathdates

I really don't see why we need consensus on this.Hoops gza (talk) 00:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Krill

I was not making test edits. I wanted to read the article on krill, but all I could see was an essay on how cows are really nice animals and suffer when slaughtered. I checked the source code for the article, and everything was fine. Reloading the page after deleting the cache didn't work. Since I don't know and don't care about official ways to report such a thing (does anyone get a notification about Talk pages?), it was all I could do.

Thank you for bringing the proper article back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.220.170.84 (talk) 08:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry but I can't remember how to start a new section of talk. AZB partners is a prominent corporate law firm, that's it! The remaining text is advertising and fluff! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Academic Recorder (talk • contribs) 13:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for protecting my userpage. I really appreciate it. Regards, P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 00:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

HBC AIV helperbot5 down?

I'm wondering whether the bot is down or malfuntioning since the AIV list is not being cleaned although we have recently blocked a number of IPs. De728631 (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Either of the two. It may stall if the page contains some odd symbols, but [7] this diff shows nothing at all. Materialscientist (talk) 13:44, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Burell Ellis

Why did you change my edit. He is in fact u deer investigation for corruption charges and it does not show up anywhere in the text. Tis is one of the most current and relevant things about the man and you deleted

Why?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.30.102 (talk) 23:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC) 

The socker

He is still persisting. Please refer to WP:AIV for more. Arctic Kangaroo 08:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I've rangeblocked 78.8.0.0/16 for a day. Materialscientist (talk) 08:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

EU has the largest GDP in all main finacial report

Why do you hide this? (see IMF GDP list by country) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mediolanum (talk • contribs) 10:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Done for now

Well, I'm done for a while, I think 28 requests, with one miss is good enough for one run. Thank you for being a 'partner in crime' in all of this, it's always a pleasure to see you answering my requests. Regards, Crazynas ^t 10:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Most of them were simply mistakes during protection, but a (very) few were tricky - "never say never" (i.e. never indefprotect), yet admins know from experience that topics like Gabe Newell and KFC are constant targets wiki-wide. Materialscientist (talk) 11:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

KFC was a mistake (as I stated at RFPP) I just didn't look at the log closely enough. Gabe Newell, that was a lack of knowledge on my part I did't consider that it might be a raid target (as Elockid obliquely pointed out). If you're interested I have a jotted a few notes, mostly for myself on this matter. I welcome any thoughts you had. Regards, Crazynas ^t 11:27, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Prions

I am trying to correct the prion information. A section describing diagnosis and treatment is not the appropriate place for a single citation regarding degradation by lichen. There are numerous sections that are inaccurate and out of date, and frankly in places this looks quite shabby.

I am a senior prion researcher trying to increase the accuracy of Wiki content ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dgsj30 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Ancient problem with minus sign

This edit in 2009 inserted several en dashes (–) where minus signs (−) are correct. Was this an isolated mistake, a malfuction, or your misconception of those days? Did it likely contaminate other pages? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I was likely mass-replacing hyphens by en dashes without caring about minus signs. I stopped doing that long ago (can't tell since when; years) and use User:GregU/dashes.js instead. Materialscientist (talk) 07:31, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you...

from Australia? Arctic Kangaroo 07:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hello. I'm presently working my way through the instances of Template:Infobox aircraft occurrence updating the parameter names used (from including uppercase and spaces to lowercase with underscores) so that the template's code may be simplified. Would this be considered a task worthy of AWB's use? CsDix (talk) 07:41, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what are you trying to fix. Assuming that these edits [8] [9] are a fix rather than a matter of personal preference, I think they should be part of more substantial updates, not a separate task. Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The latter, not the former, is an example of what I mean. What would you mean by "more substantial updates" – isn't updating old, non-standardized parameter names enough? (If not, why not – it encourages the use of the more streamlined, consistent names in future edits – ?) At the risk of "WP:BEANS", how about adding new yet-to-be-activated parameters? CsDix (talk) 09:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

(ping)

Births by date categories

Here comes another one. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:39, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, merged. Materialscientist (talk) 08:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

CO2

I saw it on PBS's 'Nature' series (original run and re-runs), an episode about an African volcano. How do you cite that? Ooops, 'original' material! You Wiki'Robots' got me again! But hey, I know the animals are still dead! You're the 'Material Scientist', right? Look it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.251.69 (talk) 10:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring on Copernican principle

You've been doing it too, though you've stayed clear of breaking 3RR (something I just blocked the other editor for). It might have been better to take the issue of the religious POV to ANI, to get more admins involved. Bishonen | talk 15:55, 23 March 2013 (UTC).

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for blocking a user which was giving me some trouble at Kwame Brown. Somehow, his vandalism edits and/or how I reviewed them screwed up the Pending Changes system and made my own rejections "pending". Thanks for preventing the vandal from doing that again! RedSoxFan2434 (talk) 23:31, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

GMT Games

It was rather discourteous of you to remove indefinite BLP semiprotection without discussing the matter with the protecting admin... but seeing the protection vanish did prompt me to go clean up the history. Have a look at the newly deleted revisions on both the article and talk page. So... do you want to join me in watchlisting the article for recurrent problems, or would you prefer to put back the indefinite BLP semiprotection? Your call. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I did not mean any disrespect. This was part of a mass request at WP:RFP; I frankly had doubt about this particular one, and am watching the page. All that said, with all due respect, indef protection without any past protection history, applied to a poorly developed article (without any quirks like sensitive title or subject), is never warranted - can't defend it by any policy or logic. Materialscientist (talk) 06:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure I can: BLP COATRACK material got stuck there by a new/anonymous editor, even three years after (2010) the initial attempts to add it (2007). If that's not persistent BLP attacks, I'm not sure what is. At any rate, I'd actually prefer we go back to Flagged Revisions level 1 for the article, but if you're also willing to watch it, it seems to be an entirely low-traffic article and very manageable. Jclemens (talk) 06:57, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I would have it protected years ago, for a few months and then increment the protection time. You can possibly defend the 2010 protection, but not the need for indef protection now, after three extremely slow years. If the same attacks resume, then we'll have a good reason to reprotect. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 07:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I can, and I just did. What is indefensible is the contra-BLP unilateral action you took to remove that protection that was specifically articulated as a BLP enforcement. Right now you are in violation of WP:BLPBAN. Please read that and note that the one-year limit is only for special enforcement actions on editors. What kept me from bringing this up before was 1) an attempt to reach a consensus with you, and 2) recognition of my own failure to Revdel the material (I was not an oversighter last time there was a problem with the article). However, in light of your ongoing failure to understand the primacy of BLP over the protection policy and the seriousness of serious BLP allegations being placed into this under-watched article, I must insist that your removal of protections be reversed--at which point you may take the issue to WP:AE for wider administrator input--or I will appeal your removal of my BLP full-protection to the arbitration committee; both actions as enumerated as the designated appeals process in WP:BLPBAN. Jclemens (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey, you are accusing me of violating something, whereas I was basically just trying to help at WP:RFP. Reprotect it as you wish and have a nice day. Materialscientist (talk) 22:16, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have articulated that option as well. Since WP:WHEEL has no particular time limit, I could have been accused of a "slow motion wheel war" had I done that without your consent. With it, I will do so. Jclemens (talk) 05:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Ghulam Nabi Azad's Controversies

Wiki content related to Ghulam Nabi Azad's controversies have been deleted by the user Materialscientist. If the content is not properly referenced, then a warning message could be given and the reference could have been added. Simply deleting the content doesn't serve the purpose.
And about the truthfulness of the content, Ghulam Nabi Azad's homophobic comments did indeed create a controversy in India and was widely reported in the most newspapers.
Please provide us sufficient reasons for deleting the post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madhavan020985 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Garance Franke-Ruta edits

I added that Garance Franke-Ruta was active in ACT UP as seen in the documentary How to Survive a Plague. I did not include a source note, since the source was stated in the sentence. It was deleted for not having a source, but I think it's relevant information. If you advise me on how to include the source properly, I will add it back in accordingly. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.75.95 (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Bret Iwan

Hi man, I just want to let you know. That is his full name. 72.71.213.103 (talk) 23:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Materialscientist, please note that this IP is what I suspect to be a sockpuppet of Bigshowandkane64 (talk · contribs). Same geographical location, same interests, same attitude, same styles. Can you please block the IP? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Superhard materials

Hi Materialscientist,

it seems you were intimately involved with the article Superhard material, so I thought it appropriate to bring something to your attention.

I find some statements in the "definition and mechanics of hardness" section rather confusing, and others seem incorrect to me.

Now this could be because I am extrapolating concepts from metal hardness, but clarifying statements would be rather helpful to readers in any case.

I didn't edit the article itself, but left a note on the talk page (Talk:Superhard_material).

Thank you. Commutator (talk) 01:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

JBean65 (talk · contribs) wrote that article. I tried to fix it and will see what I can do further (time is short right now, and, frankly, hardness is not my favorite topic). Materialscientist (talk) 01:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I understand. My own (recent) contributions to Wikipedia have been limited to "complaining" on talk / user pages to draw the attention of experts to articles in need of fixing. It is a shame, and I wish I could do more, but I just haven't found time to make substantial edits myself and this allows me to contribute to the project in some (minor) way. Commutator (talk) 05:52, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Graphene Oxide Growth Article

Hi, I refer to the RSC Nanoscale article on the 1st paper that demonstrated the Growth of Graphene Oxide. I will wish to put the fact that the growth had been established into the article. I believe it is very helpful to the general user. This is in contrast to the growth of Graphene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.194.72 (talk) 20:45, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has separate articles on separate topics, i.e. put information on graphene oxide growth in graphene oxide article, not in graphene article (which is already overly long, and is being constantly stuffed up with all kind of transient reports). Materialscientist (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your great administrative actions!

	The Hard Worker's Barnstar
	You appear to work extremely hard and are constantly concentrating on doing what's in best interest of Wikipedia! Endofskull (talk) 01:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

STRAWBERRYS

Thankyou for that fix FBfilmsdaily (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

National Geographic article

How about seeing if you can get the May 1985 article about ""The search for the atom" included in the reference section so that interested persons can see and hopefully learn from the pictures and illustrations. It's a very good summary of the state of the art of atomic physics knowledge about the atom as of 1985.WFPM (talk) 22:41, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Very good work at Bonobo. Keep it up. Pratyya (Hello!) 06:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Will Brown page reversion

The nickname for the University at Albany is UAlbany, not Albany, as identified on the jersey itself: http://files.leagueathletics.com/Images/Pictures/2881/335626.jpg

It should either be listed as 'University at Albany' in Brown's coaching record or 'UAlbany,' not Albany by itself. That's a reference either the city or Albany State college in Georgia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.226.73.37 (talk) 19:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Question

Hi Materialscientist, you were helpful when I had a previous question about bot reports at AIV. Could you give me a heads up on whether a report like this requires a block? It doesn't appear to be anything out of the ordinary, but it was being reported by the bots. Thanks, Spencer^T♦C 01:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Depends on the bot. Mr.Z-bot (talk · contribs) reports anyone who triggers an edit filter that was added to User:Mr.Z-bot/filters.js. Filters differ by the "quality" and target - some warrant immediate block, some do not. Fixed position vandalism may be something very nasty or may be just an experiment. For me, the criteria are (i) whether the target is a template (very suspicious), mainframe article (suspicious) or own userspace (not really); and (ii) what they were trying to achieve. Point (ii) is often hard to see behind the code. The embedded image (search for .jpg/.svg/.png) and its size (if it is oversized then it is likely an attempt to mask the page by that image) provide a hint. Presence of an http link in the code may be a sign of hijacking attempt. For example, add a transparent oversized image of anything, link that image to some external page, and then any click on that page will take the reader away to some website. Materialscientist (talk) 02:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks! Spencer^T♦C 19:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Citing

I have made changes to the English Schools' Football Association but i dont have sources to link in as i have them all on my hard drive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed mitchell14 (talk • contribs) 11:32, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi. I have requested peer review of Robert Hooke (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), I wonder if this subject might interest you. I would like to start pushing the article towards FA, Hooke is, for me, one of the most interesting figures in the history of science. Guy (Help!) 20:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

PTFE Slick 50 references

http://www.slick50.com/ourProducts/FAQs.shtml (Does Slick 50® still contain PTFE?) http://ftc.gov/opa/1996/07/slick.shtm (false claims, unsubstantiated advertsising) http://www.ultimatesyntheticoil.com/oil_additives/facts_about_aftermarket_oil_additives.htm (clogging oil galleries, filters, screens) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.5.10 (talk) 01:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Piss off! Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.132.4 (talk) 01:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thulium

Hi,

I noticed that this edit removed a lot of content that was useful (for instance, the isotope information). I also noticed you made a few copyedits, so I didn't revert it for the time being. But why the removal?

^King Jakob _C2 11:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I haven't removed isotope information, but changed the order of paragraphs (not sure about that, but it felt better). Other removed information was either repeating the infobox, or not verifiable. The neutron reflector para was misplaced (not an application) and too vague (actually WP:OR). I first thought to integrate it into properties, but then just removed. Thulium is too rare for making reflectors out of it (they have to be massive). Materialscientist (talk) 11:43, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

What parts were not verified? I made sure to add citations for everything I put in. ^King Jakob _C2 22:28, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I could not verify the alpha (tetragonal) phase in the literature. It was absent in the cited CRC source. The rest was more or less Ok, just some sources were unreliable. Materialscientist (talk) 22:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Block Length

"1 year, 119 days, 18 hours, 10 minutes and 48 seconds". Just out of curiosity, why such a specific length? FrigidNinja 12:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The block template accepts various time formats, and we often give them as xxx months or xxx weeks, and the wikisoftware converts them to these funny numbers (considering the exact months of the year). I guess it was 16 months in this case. Materialscientist (talk) 13:05, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Makes sense. It just seemed a bit strange. FrigidNinja 14:27, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

URGENT: IP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:24.1.132.93

This ip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:24.1.132.93 that you blocked in February for 3 months is currently adding racist comments to their talk page. These could be deemed highly offensive, can you block them from editing their talk page?

Thanks Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud 20:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)  Done. Favonian (talk) 20:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud 20:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

71.75.246.167

I've been asked to shorten my block of 71.75.246.167 (talk · contribs · 71.75.246.167 WHOIS). S/he was blocked after this gem. I suspect it's a dynamic IP on long-term assignment to a school. I've told the admin who is handling the request that I'll defer to you. Your comments would be appreciated. Toddst1 (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd agree that this IP is either assigned to school or used by pupils. It has a history of abuse and warnings, thus a long block is justified. The length is up to the blocking admin. I'd anonblock for a month and then increment. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 01:11, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Though the WHOIS says "Allocations for this OrgID serve Road Runner residential customers out of the Columbus, OH, Herndon, VA and Raleigh, NC RDCs." What indicates that it's from a school? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:47, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Nothing, just a hunch :-) (I don't know if this is a school IP). We have very poor information on most IPs - I know several clusters that are school IPs (from other locators), but contain nothing on that in whois. I also suspect they copy/paste a template over the entire range even if some IPs in it are assigned to something else. Materialscientist (talk) 01:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

It's behavioral. Think WP:DUCK. After you've seen a few hundred static IPs that are resolving as registered to school districts, the pattern is pretty easy to spot. Both MatSci and I have blocked hundreds if not thousands of registered schools.

One of the most obvious data points is that Geolocates to Waxhaw, NC. There apparently isn't much in Waxhaw, but schools are everywhere. IPs with a sustained history of sophmoric vandalism over weeks or months, especially within a band of a few hours on different days/weeks during school/detention hours, from the middle of nowhere are usually schools or libraries.

In short, it looks like a sticky dynamic IP address assigned to a school or library (not much difference really).Toddst1 (talk) 02:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Chris Jericho

Thanks for jumping in and taking care of the Chris Jericho page so quickly. All of a sudden it became the article to vandalize. SQGibbon (talk) 01:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Papilio macilentus.jpg

Hi, Materialscientist. About File:Papilio macilentus.jpg, one of your photos, a user familiar with　biology　said "This is not Papilio macilentus. Perhapps this is Atrophaneura alcinous." (at ja:File talk:Papilio macilentus.jpg) There are several kinds of black big butterfies in Japan, which are hard to identify. Some sites says Atrophaneura alcinous has a red line in body but Papilio macilentus does not. Do you mind renaming this photo of yours? Regards.--miya (talk) 06:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

It is my photo, and I would be glad to rename, but I'd prefer to have a more certain ID. Yes, identification is tricky, and I used some web site devoted to butterflies, but don't remember which one (too long ago). Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 06:29, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok. I'll look for more certain source, and, if any, will report to Commons:File talk:Papilio macilentus.jpg. Thank you.--miya (talk) 07:55, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sir! I just want your intervention at Mukti Bahini. I added 'facts and figures' from neutral, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi sources, but two editors collaborated and reverted my edits. I did clean-ups and fixes in the Artcle too but they were reverted too, but they were reverted too with the reason of "junk". I had started the discussion at talk about the references for figures of killed Biharis, but the two editors combined reverted everything. They say that the references that I have provided them are not accessible to them(And This is not a reason of removing them). Instead of discussion at talk, where I had started discussion, they reverted my edits. An editor requested another on his talk, and then they both collaborated. They also made comments against my approved rollback request here. About the references for Bihari killings, they say that they are not accessible. I am new to Wikipedia relatively, and thus I came to you for Administrator intervention as I don't have any collaborator. I request to you to go through the Article's history and the Talk's history, I did not engage in edit war but they tried their best. Now you are only my hope. I have requested some other Administrators too! Please Sir! HELP! Faizan (talk) 14:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Mukti Bahini

Hello Sir! I just want your intervention at Mukti Bahini. I added 'facts and figures' from neutral, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi sources, but two editors collaborated and reverted my edits. I did clean-ups and fixes in the Artcle too but they were reverted too, but they were reverted too with the reason of "junk". I had started the discussion at talk about the references for figures of killed Biharis, but the two editors combined reverted everything. They say that the references that I have provided them are not accessible to them(And This is not a reason of removing them). Instead of discussion at talk, where I had started discussion, they reverted my edits. An editor requested another on his talk, and then they both collaborated. They also made comments against my approved rollback request here. About the references for Bihari killings, they say that they are not accessible. I am new to Wikipedia relatively, and thus I came to you for Administrator intervention as I don't have any collaborator. I request to you to go through the Article's history and the Talk's history, I did not engage in edit war but they tried their best. Now you are only my hope. I have requested some other Administrators too! Pleae Sir! HELP! Faizan (talk) 14:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

And in this diff, you can see that editor's humor. Faizan (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

And you can also see Bbb23's comments here. Faizan (talk) 15:53, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Disruptive behaviour from a new editor

A new user named User:Merenjith is indulging in disruptive editing in the article Kunchacko Boban. When I tried to revert the NPOV and copyright violations in the BLP article, he started indulging in edit warring. Then when I added the refimprove tag in the article, he removed that as well and accused me of vandalism. JK (talk) 15:05, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Also there seems to be some kind of understanding between the above mentioned account and another new user London at night. See diff JK (talk) 15:08, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

User JK

User JK is removing the source from article Kunchacko Boban. he is a fan of dileep he change source from kunchacko boban and he promoting dileep «»[10]«» Merenjith (talk • contribs) 16:55, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Query about a block

I see that you blocked Match summary for 1 week for abusing multiple accounts, on 28 March. However, as you can see here, here, here, here, and here, the user was already blocked indefinitely in several accounts, so I wonder whether you really meant to block the Match summary account only for one week, effectively reducing the existing block length? JamesBWatson (talk) 17:25, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

This was an emergency block to stop edit warring. At the time of that block, Match summary was reliably linked only to Mollywood1 (who was actively warring, and whom I indeffed), but not to the whole group. I do not mind any alteration to my block. Materialscientist (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

...for protecting Arthur Conan Doyle. - Fantr (talk) 17:34, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing to Emma MacLaren's page

To whom this may concern,

Pleas may I ask that the minor writing edits for career and early life for Emma MacLaren's page be restored. It is important that these edits be restored, so that they are up-to-date and current. The minor edits just made were for image upload and a 'test' to see if it would work. Unfortunately it didn't. Thank you.

Kindest Regards Bluecitrus16 (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

User talk:108.25.118.37

Hi Materialscientist, please revoke his talk page access. Thanks. Arctic Kangaroo 03:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Speed of light

Thank you for providing clarification on this. I'm not sure exactly at what point research becomes eligible for inclusion; for example, the Wikipedia article on the Higgs Boson states that it was "tentatively confirmed to exist on 14 March 2013", since although everything that has been discovered so far is consistent with the properties such a particle might possess, researchers themselves acknowledged that much work remains before the particle’s exact nature can be determined. And the Wikipedia article on Life on Mars seems quite speculative, stating, for example that "the best potential locations for discovering life on Mars may be at subsurface environments that have not been studied yet." The article on Wave-particle duality has an extensive section on alternative views, freely acknowledging that while the equations seem to work, there is controversy over the science, something that now also appears to be the case with the constant c.

Hence all three of the Wikipedia articles I have cited above appear, prima facie, to fail the conventional rigorous tests for scientific proof, making asertions that some might consider tenuous at best. There apppear to be countless other examples. For consistency, I think you would have to delete huge swathes of all of these articles, too, something that I would not be in favour of. Where there is controversy in the science, from respected sources, as part of the factual description of that science, an encyclopaedia should acknowledge this.

Hence, in the case of the speed of light, these two completely separate papers, both with the backing of respected institutions like the Max Planck Institute, are just as consistent with the science as the aforementioned examples. The second paper, in particular, is merely an extension of currently generally accepted Quantum level mechanisms, and is as consistent with empirical evidence as the current state of play in the hunt for the boson. Experimental results support the hypothesis. Thus at what point would it be appropriate to cite new research? Is it at the stage of peer review? How much experimental evidence is needed? I would be grateful for your considered feedback. David cambridge (talk) 10:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

We need indication that this new theory is accepted by the broad scientific community, preferably in secondary sources. You have cited two primary sources, published in a minor journal (EPJD, impact factor 1.5). Science News is just a mirror of the original articles (lay summary), and can not be counted as a secondary sources in this case. Before including new theories, especially in a major, "featured" article like Speed of light, it is always a good idea to start a thread on its talk first, proposing an inclusion, and wait for reaction. If no reply, WT:PHYS is a good alternative venue. Materialscientist (talk) 11:38, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. David cambridge (talk) 04:04, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

March 2013

I understand that but if you Reverting it back then Revert all the others actors also include Dileep, Kunchacko Boban, Prithviraj Sukumaran. thanks 80 (talk)

I want your answer