User talk:DMacks: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:52, 5 August 2013

This is DMacks's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63: 14 days

Thanks

Thank you DMacks I will come back to you if I have doubt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basappa.br 3418 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 3 July 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Fractional distillation

I see you reverted my change in fractional distillation because you have never heard of a type of distillation where you need to cool the substance in question. Well, what if the boiling point is below temperatures you are comfortable with? See argon for a proper example of fractional distillation at a chilly temperature.--JeR (talk) 05:56, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it myself (both intentionally and accidentally) with oxygen. But I've never heard the process where one starts with a gas and cools it until it condenses distillation. Either one can simply cool a mixture of gases until one condenses (isn't that just condensation not distillation?) or cool the whole mixture until they all condense (a mixture of liquids) and then distill the liquid mixture (but then doesn't the distillation process itself begin with the mixed-liquid warming?). See Air separation#Cryogenic liquification process for example. Regarding your edit-summary comment that distillation does not require heating, it requires some energy source to go from liquid to gas, although that could simply be stopping the cooling or reducing the insulation or pressurization around a cryogenic liquid. DMacks (talk) 13:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Detroit

Please justify your claim of edit warring, or remove that warning from my talk page. Rsloch (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have removed the Popper section six times in the past 4 days. I warned User:Lance Friedman simultaneously to you as you two seem to be the ones involved in the repeated add/remove cycles. I see there is discussion on the talk-page, which is a perfect chance to take a step back from the article while you're involved in the discussion and let it play out...see what others think, see if outside/fresh eyes can help figure out some consensus way forward. DMacks (talk) 16:40, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of us was involved in an edit war as described in Wikipedia's rules. We don't seem to have broken the 3RR rule, we took our issues to the talk page and discussed them at length before further edits were made. So I ask you to remove the warnings.Rsloch (talk) 17:14, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You removed it twice within two hours just today while the discussion still seems ongoing. Seems like you even are at the edge of 3RR. But 3RR is a circuit-breaker limit that leads to an automatic block; "3 times in 24h" is just one form of edit-warring--now you know. The warning has apparently done its job of alerting you to the behavior problem and EW definitions, and hopefully you can continue discussion while leaving the article in its present state. DMacks (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please review the conduct of users editing the Detroit page again, we seem to be nearing edit war territory once more TheKitchenSink (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ampholytes

Thanks for pointing out that water is an amphoteric compound and not a zwitterion. Water seems to be amphiprotic because it can either accept or donate a proton. Is this right: An amphoteric molecule acts as either an acid or a base and can form either a cation or an anion, while an ampholyte can exist as a zwitterion with both a cation and anion present in the molecule.Rachel Doolittle (talk) 04:03, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your original edit was actually pretty good per the IUPAC descriptions of the words (I overstated the problem in my edit-summary) and the common types of molecules many readers might know (amino acids, etc.). They describe ampholytes as approximately the subset of amphoteric compounds that can exist as zwitterions. What's annoying (and the reason I didn't use the word "ampholyte" when I re-added the idea) is that lots of other publications (textbooks, even some scientific journal articles) are not completely consistent with how they use that word. Some seem to use "ampholyte" for anything amphoteric, even things that can only act as an acid or a base at any specific pH. Even more confusing (I just noticed this while looking up the defintions) IUPAC also suggests that an ampholyte could have its zwitterion in ways other than pH sensitivity. DMacks (talk) 04:45, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

For being all silly with my silly edits. --Sömò Karfi (talk) 18:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not Spam

You have removed my links and accused them of being spam. They couldn't be further from spam, they were all written very carefully and purposely with Wikipedia in mind. There is no need to quote Wikipedia's guidelines regarding spam I already know them well. We are a professional authority site which produces excellent content on a range of topics and I would appreciate if you would reinstate each of the links you removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.87.77 (talk) 16:18, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what pages or links you are talking about. This is the first edit you have made from this IP address, so I cannot even trace back your edit history to try to figure it out:( DMacks (talk) 17:16, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What do we do with user:Nicolodeonicx?

I'm glad to note that you are an admin. Hopefully you have an idea on how to approach or deal with user Nicolodeonicx. You have commented on her talk page.

I have just spent 2 hr correcting her many errors. I'd guess that English is not her native tongue -- she states that she is a "proud Filipina". I believe that all her edits are good faith ones while very few of them are grammatically correct. (She mixes up singular/plural, verb tenses and repeatedly changes correct prepositions to wrong ones, etc.) (She also "corrects" Brit. spelling and grammar, and marks all her edits minor. Those are just policy matters she hasn't learned.)

If you look at her contributions, you'll see that she's working on articles in alphabetical order. She's not come very far in the alphabet, and I can't spend so much time on her every few days. Help?

--Hordaland (talk) 19:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't figure out the pattern of articles she is using. Thanks for helping to clean up the cleanup mess! Now that I've left a warning, I've watchlisted her talkpage to see if there's a response, and will also check back in a day or so if there are any new edits and go from there. DMacks (talk) 19:10, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Hordaland (talk) 21:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

multiverse

Hey,, I am in the process of editing and you jump in and delete without giving time to properly address the text --Gausachs (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2013 (UTC)Gausachs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gausachs (talk • contribs)

Copyright violations are strictly prohibited and must not exist at all ever even for a moment. I recommend you write from scratch without any basis in promotional tone. Otherwise you'll always look like promotional. DMacks (talk) 18:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why dont you help instead of interfere and making it more difficult --Gausachs (talk) 18:50, 3 August 2013 (UTC) Gausachs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gausachs (talk • contribs)

Gausachs has received many warnings from other users for the same problems (he blanked his talk page once [[1]), that is using Wikipedia as an free advertising website to promote for his pageant called Miss Multiverse which I thought it's a scam pageant but he he claims it is more important than World's premier and long history pageants like Miss Universe or Miss World (Evidences: [2], [3], [4])

Another evidence which I thought I can not stand this spammer anymore [5]. Hello! Your "pity pageant" is just around 20 contestants and 5 years old whie there are at least over hundred pageants which are much bigger numbers of contestant, older history and more proffessional. And he also created CLONE ARTICLES related to his "pity pageant" Miss Multiverse (whatever): Miss Multiverse Dominican Republic, Miss Multiverse Belgium, Miss Multiverse Netherlands.

As well as creating unsourced articles of sponsors as a part in his contract: SuperCanal, Women Empowerment Foundation. That is enough, those kind of users and his related artciles should be removed from Wikipedia as soon as possible. I just want to give some evidences to show it off. Thank you. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 08:33, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Angelo de la Paz

you take this Wikipedia a bit to personal, what frightens me the most is your unprofessional use of words, like what is the real necesity of saying this is a "pity" and how obsessive you are about putting this pageant down as if it is bothering you in some kind of personal way, perhaps you are their competition or a director of another pageant.

Never the less i ask the Wikipedia comunity to please look at the agressive, unpolite and unprofessional behavior of this person Mr. Angelo De La Paz.

There most be some kind of control for this sort of behavior

I am new to Wikipedia and i ask for those who are here a long time to remember what it was like when you where learning how to use it, place references etc...

and what it would feel like if you run in to a STALKER like this Mr. De La Paz

PLEASE HELP

--Gausachs (talk) 11:52, 5 August 2013 (UTC)Gausachs[reply]