User talk:Edgar181/Archive11

	Archives
	Oct 2005 - May 2006; Jun 2006 - Sep 2006; Oct 2006 - Feb 2007; Mar 2007 - May 2007; Jun 2007 - Sep 2007; Oct 2007 - Dec 2007; Jan 2008 - Mar 2008; Apr 2008 - Jun 2008; Jul 2008 - Sep 2008; Oct 2008 - ;

Please read before editing:

Please add new comments to the bottom of the page. You can use the "new section" button above to start a new topic.
In general, I will respond here to comments, rather than on your talk page, so that the conversation isn't scattered.
If you want to know why I blocked an IP address, you have to let me know what IP address you are referring to.
If you want to know why I deleted an article, you have to let me know what article you are referring to.

Physostigmine structure formula

Can you take a look at the structure svg. I think it is vandalized by changing the svg. All Cs and Ns are suddenly huge. 70.137.138.233 (talk) 10:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it is vandalism, but rather some kind of bug in the way Wikipedia displays SVGs. In any case, I have created a PNG and replaced it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey Man, This has already been clear up TWICE

Hello Edgar181,

This is your neighborhood, friendly buzzboygt. I respect that you are trying to keep the junk off of Wikipedia, but the article, Clayton McClure, is not junk. It has been disputed several times that this article did not belong in the wikiverse, but it has been proven, undeniably that Clayton McClure has made a great impact on history.

Can you please place this article back.

Thank-you,

buzzboygt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buzzboygt (talk • contribs) 23:23, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The article was deleted by User:Tone because of the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clayton McClure. If you would like to discuss his decision, it would be best to contact him instead. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks on Acepentalene

Thanks for adding the diagram and information box on acepentalene. I wanted to do it but couldn't figure out how to copy my diagram of the molecule into Wikipedia, and I didn't have in my possession any of the other information.

If there's anything I can do to help with chemistry articles, let me know. I am a graduate student at a major university, so I have access to journal articles and all kinds of fun stuff (not to mention other people I can talk to...). Crystal whacker (talk) 22:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for creating the article. If you need help with uploading images, or with anything else, please just let me know and I'd be happy to help out. If there are things you're looking to do, there is certainly no shortage of work to be done - anything in Category:Chemistry stubs could be expanded, for example. There is also an organized effort to improve Wikipedia's chemistry articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject chemistry and Wikipedia:WikiProject chemicals, if you haven't seen them already. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that's great. Crystal whacker (talk) 23:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ed. Can you please remove one of the two full stops at the end? Thanks. --Leyo 17:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Done --Rifleman 82 (talk) 17:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Rifleman. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

IMHO it's a pitty that so many templates here are fully protected, so that they can be edited only by administrators. --Leyo 22:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is a pity; but due to the extent of the organized vandalism done to widely used templates, it is becoming more common. The best solution would be to make many, many more users administrators; but unfortunately, I don't see the burdensome RFA process getting easier any time soon. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:50, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Kespa

Hello, I don't understand how you could delete KeSPA. This organization is one of the most influential bodies in the e-Sports world, specifically on the Starcraft scene. I don't know how to view the article now but I am sure someone must have mentioned it? Without KeSPA, South Korea would not have 2 TV channels sending live e-Sport games 24/7, there would be no sponsored teams etc. Please put it back... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rollebolle (talk • contribs) 17:54, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

The article I deleted back in September did not contain any content that indicated its notability. If you think the organization meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, and you are willing to write a more comprehensive article, you are free to do so. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Ethyl gallate

I would have guessed that the formula was Ga(OEt)₃. ;-) --Itub (talk) 07:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Gallate is a rare disambig page where organic and inorganic chemistry live together. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:48, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Organofluorine chemistry, Fluorocarbon, etc

It would be helpful if you advised on this area. Itub has his hands really full, and I am barely available this week. My message to user:Beetstra indicates my views. The problem is solvable but requires community attention.--Smokefoot (talk) 13:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I have been following the discussions related to these articles and I have left a couple of talk page comments. But yes, you're right, I haven't become actively involved. I will try to help out more in terms of resolving the content issues. I have also left a message on Shootbamboo's talk page expressing my opionion about his editing. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Answer

User pages are not supposed to be used for testing, the page DOESN'T belong to them.--Megaman en m (talk) 23:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Testing is perfectly acceptable on user pages. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I've searched for rules on user page, and found out that testing is allowed. Someone else told me it wasn't.--Megaman en m (talk) 23:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, glad it's cleared up. Also, thanks for all the speedy deletion tagging and vandalism-reverting you do. Cheers, -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

block based on a mild username

Was the immediate username block of User:Ohshitohno, based on nothing but the name, really necessary? Wikipedia is not censored, and the mere presence of the phrase "oh shit" is not so disruptive that it requires a block.

I can somewhat understand the temptation to IAR and block such a name in the hope that you were blocking a disruptive user behind it, but each time IAR is invoked for a username block it brings UAA more out of step with the username policy. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 15:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with censorship. That suggestion is just plain silly. And where you think I have invoked WP:IAR just puzzles me (are you confusing me with someone else?). This has to do with guidelines at WP:IU. Those guidelines are subjective and you've got to realize that different admins are going to interpret words such as "obviously inappropriate" and "make harmonious editing difficult" slightly differently than you do. Usernames like these get blocked everyday. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Vandal Back in Action

I leave it you, but I saw you had blocked this IP user earlier.[1] Might be a good time to do so again. Thanks.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 20:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Warning them was the right thing to do. If he persists, I'll block. Thanks for letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Magnolia Student Video Festival

Hi I am a new user and tried to put an article of video festival, but it was deleted several times. The festival for sollege and high school students in the USA and outside countries.

So please let me know what the problem is and how I can fix it. You can fine some articles below. Thank you.

http://news.southernarkansasuniversity.info/academics/lpa/2008/04/first-magnolia-student-film-festival-to-be-held-at-sau/550/

http://www.sautmc.com/Site/Theatre_and_Mass_Communication.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bugontherock (talk • contribs) 20:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The article Magnolia Student Video Festival and your user page were deleted multiple times as either blantant advertising (see WP:CSD#G11) or as an article that does not indicate why its subject is important (see WP:CSD#A7). User pages should not be used for promotional purposes (see WP:USER) and Wikipedia articles must meet notability criteria outlined at Wikipedia:Notability. I think it is clear that Wikipedia simply isn't a suitable place for an article about the Magnolia Student Video Festival. There are other websites that you can turn to if you wish to write about it or promote it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

My vandalism report

Thanks for the quick action. I had a question: as noted in my vandalism report, the account Josiah117 was recently created by User:Mr ownage117 see here. The talk page of Mr ownage117 indicates that the account was indefinitely blocked and it too had created the speedily deleted article Josiah Nelson. I wonder how the former account, which was banned on the 10th created the new account today? Should I report this somewhere, or what do you reckon? Nja247 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

When an admin blocks someone, they have a choice of whether to prevent further account creation or not. In this case, User:Gwen Gale permitted account creation when she blocked Mr ownage117. When someone is blocked for having an inappropriate username, they are generally allowed to sign up with another (unless the name is particularly egregious). -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification on the process. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Chloroethylnorapomorphine

Hey no worries, its easy to miss a detail when you're just going through someone else's stubs quickly and adding stuff to them - I just saw the structural similarity to propylnorapomorphine and was like, hmm thats got to be a dopamine receptor ligand rather than an opioid! Meodipt (talk) 22:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Airing it all out

Ed, I wanted to write this as a gesture of respect and good-will to find some sort of resolution to the consequences of my edits with you. I am sure I came off as disrespectful with the boldness of my editing on the fluorocarbon talk page and elsewhere. I am sorry that my efforts to calm the situation only made things worse until they got better. Unfortunately for some it is not in my nature to not be bold. I am looking forward to the day when I can practice boldness without upsetting others and when it is most pragmatic. So please don't interpret my contintued "boldness" as an affront to the advice you gave me. (I am concerned it may). To show a bit of positivity with my boldness, take a look here under "To discuss or to BRD." Sorry this was so messy. Thank you for your patience. I'm sure I aggravated the hell out of you. I was quite a frustrated editor. And I must say, I was quite frustrated by your contributions to the page, that suggested pharmaceuticals and fluorocarbons were too closely related to justify splitting off. Then you came in again only to chirp up against my productivity. I felt like some sort of established Wikipedia editing class was simply trying to frustrate my efforts, without listening to the logic I provided. And after taking a look at all the chatter about me, instead of to me on the Wikipedia Chem talk page, I can half-way understand why this might have happened. However, I felt it was my duty to assail against any bureauocratic illogical efforts. I hope I haven't provided enough bold energy to sublime or evaporate your good-will towards me. I am afraid I might have though. My instincts tell me our personalities clash, oddly enough. Admittedly, I wanted to err on the side of being too bold starting out. I just wanted to express that I am not ignornant of the consequences to this approach. I never thought it would get this messy. I figured it would be best to air it all of this out to you. I hope you can view me in a more positive manner. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 05:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I very much appreciate your comments. The comment I left on your talk page was well-meaning, and was intended to try to diffuse tensions a bit. But since your response was to think that you must have "aggravated the hell out of me", which is not true at all, then I think my comment must have come across wrong in some way. And I'd like to emphasize that I never doubted your good intentions toward improving Wikipedia's chemistry articles. I'm sorry if I implied otherwise in any way. I think there is plenty of common ground that can be found with discussion and careful editing. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

And thanks for your comments I appreciate them very much also. I'm glad I didn't aggravate. I was putting your edit together with another editor's comments, so that could have easily led to misperceptions on my part. Thanks again. -Shootbamboo (talk) 01:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Betty Baba

I noticed that you deleted the Betty Baba article. Thanks. I'm curious: since the discussion on AFD was closed, why is it still unlocked? Wouldn't it be a better policy to lock pages instead of simply asking people not to edit them further? Thanks. --Cbdorsett (talk) 06:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, the person who created the article several times said they wouldn't do it again. Protecting the article from being created again can be done if necessary, but just didn't seem worth the trouble at the time. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the Deletion of my unused page Appriciate it [ Rhodes416 ] [Talk] 16:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Wiki-Saboteur

Thanks for blocking this account. I was watching him to see if he would continue his first few edits after I reverted them, but I think his user name belied his intentions. - Ahunt (talk) 20:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. He made his intentions clear and a quick block ensued. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

deleting user

In doing website work for aris software I noticed that all of it's 4 major competitors had wikipedia pages amdocs, convergys, Portal software and Intec. All created by employees of there respective companies. I therefore do not see any reason for the deletion of my account for attempting to create such a page. especially considering I had not even published the information but was using the scratch pad as per wiki instructions to test out copy and pasted info to see aritcle structure —Preceding unsigned comment added by Circuitsports (talk • contribs) 22:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I didn't delete your account, just the user page. That page is really supposed to be about you, rather than containing an encyclopedia article. But that's not really a bit deal. I have restored the content that was there to User:Circuitsports/Aris where you can work on it. As it stands, it really comes across as advertising, rather than being written from a neutral point of view. That's why I thought you were simply trying to advertise. I would strongly recommend toning it down a bit before creating an article with it. Hope this helps. -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

error in the structure of tentoxin

respected Edgar181,

I found a mistake in the structure of tentoxin.instead of leucine,there is alanine in the structure.so,please edit the structure as early as possible.(ref. for correct structure tet.lett. 15, 46, 4037).

with regards NAGAPRADEEP —Preceding unsigned comment added by NAGAPRADEEP (talk • contribs) 12:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:10, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

All fixed now. Thanks again for catching the error. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Goostyyy

User Goostyyy has vandalised again. Maybe you can block him or explain to me how to go about it. Same goes for users Mataboom and Ninja43. JMK (talk) 12:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Normally giving a user who is vandalizing several warnings before blocking is the standard process, but since these three users are all either the same person or several people working together, I have gone ahead and blocked them all. To block a user, you must be an administator, but anyone can report vandals at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism (if they persist after several warnings) and an admin will quickly take care of it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Waitaminute...

Howdy,

Why'd you delete Caliban (character)? You referenced G8, but that seems to be more about dangling Talk pages or dead-end redirects. Wrong button? --Xover (talk) 05:35, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

It was, in fact, a dead-end redirect. But it looks like someone took a good redirect and made it a redirect to a non-existent page, so I have restored the page and reverted to the original redirect. Thanks for catching the problem and letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy fix. --Xover (talk) 14:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing my attic

Thanks for removing my old draft reviews! --Philcha (talk) 17:12, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

TV3 Medford

Hello Edgar,

TV3 Medford is currently going through an "evaluation hearing", a very unique situation where the "Issuing Authority" (Mayor Michael J. McGlynn of Medford) has a retired judge scrutinizing how the monies are being spent.

The current webmaster of the corporation being investigated appears to be vandalizing the TV3 Medford site on Wikipedia and removing the pertinent information which is of historical importance.

As a "Performance Evaluation" is a serious event in access television, it is noteworthy. These type of things rarely happen. It is not a judgment on whether the non-profit currently holding the license survives or not, it is of great public interest, especially as Access TV in America faces new challenges from the cable providers. This is the other side of the coin, that the ratepayers and citizens are actually getting some oversight on how their station is being run.

I notice ZappTV put 3 edits in a 24 hour period:

(Reverted 1 edit by Tv3medford identified as vandalism to last revision by Zapptv. using TW) (undo)

The postings on November 19-November 25 including ISP 66.30.0.170 all seem to be from the webmaster either using his home ISP or the one at the station.

It isn't fair that the private non-profit vandalize the site when the information on the evaluation serves the public interest.

your input on this discussion page is appreciated.

Thanks, and Happy Thanksgiving.

Petition (talk) 06:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)petitionPetition (talk) 06:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

If you think there are problems with the article, you are free to make changes to it. I don't know much at all about this topic, and I don't see any need for administrative action at this point. I notice that there has been no discussion at all on the article's talk page. You can make your preferred changes to the article, explain about your edits and comment about other people's edits on the article's talk page, and invite the other editors to comment there as well. If this doesn't lead to results that you are happy with, probably the best thing to do would be to seek help from Wikipedia's dispute resolution (see WP:Dispute resolution). I hope this helps. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Tetrafluoroethane

Can you take a look here? It looks wrong. Not sure what to do with it. -Shootbamboo (talk) 06:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

The page looks fine to me. Sometimes different browser/monitor/computer combinations can lead to different issues. Can you be more specific about the problem you see? -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:42, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

It used to be a "disambiguation" page with only two links, one of which was a red link. I turned it into a redirect, which is what it was until an anonymous user modified it. If one day we have article on the other isomer, we could consider turning it into a dab again. --Itub (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Itub, that seems reasonable to me. Shootbamaboo, is this what you were referring to? -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

exactly, thanks Itub. -Shootbamboo (talk) 23:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Disodium methyl arsenate

Thanks for the article! I put it into the arsenic page. I was not aware that the people in the US like to life in houses made of arsenic chromium and copper, but wood preservation is one thing, but to put onto plants is another. I do not like the arsenic ...bicides, I had to smell AsH3 once and that was enough.--Stone (talk) 23:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, aresenic compounds have a long history of use, but fortunately not so much today. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

The Elements of Murder by John Emsley from page 93 on! I liked it!--Stone (talk) 14:53, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Looks like an interesting book. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:54, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Removal of Carlton Leach page

You removed the page about Carlton Leach and you stated he was not a real person. Maybe you should read up? He is a former gangster from England. The movie Rise of the Footsoldier was based on his life.

I did not claim anywhere that Carlton Leach was not a real person. I deleted the article because it did not contain any content that indicated the subject's importance. If you feel that Carlton Leach meets Wikipedia's inclusion criteria (see WP:BIO) and you are willing to write a more thorough article, please feel free to do so. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Structure of Uvinul A Plus

Dear Edgar, The structure you add for Uvinul A Plus has a small error. The strucure you draw is for Hexyl 2-[3-(diethylamino)-2-hydroxybenzoyl]benzoate but the substance is Hexyl 2-[4-(diethylamino)-2-hydroxybenzoyl]benzoate. The diethylamino group should be on the carbon 4, not 3.

The structure I drew matched the one at the PubChem link, but checking with Chemical Abstracts, it seems that structure is wrong. I have now corrected my image. Thanks for catching the error and letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

The IP address you just blocked

Hi! A bit of an edit conflict occurred when you blocked User:89.167.221.3. I was just about to make the comment against the report on AIV "There appears to be an issue with blocking this IP address, as it blocks more than just the company. See User talk:89.167.221.3#Looks like a wikipedia ip lookup bug" when I found that you had already blocked it. It looks like it was blocked once this morning, then released a short while later. I thought I ought to fore-warn you, as someone may ask for it to be unblocked shortly. I agree that the edits are persistant vandalism, and as such the user should be blocked. However, as it affects so many people, a shorter block may be called for, or some other action. I'm no expert in IP addresses, socks, meats or anything like that, so I can't really suggest what should be done. But I thought I should at least give you the chance to do further investigation/prepare a justification for blocking/leave the country to avoid the screaming mob (delete as applicable *grin*). Cheers! StephenBuxton (talk) 12:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

You just beat me to it with your message. The problem does need resolving quickly (and there are two discussions about the issues on WP:AN at the moment.) I've been formally warning at repeated level 4 since my block was removed (reasonably given the problem, I think) to enable the case for a quick resolution to be given as much weight as possible. DDStretch (talk) 12:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, both of you. I have unblocked for now. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Propagermanium

Hi Ed, I'm pretty sure this compound is a polymer—see e.g [2] and PMID 11440636. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you're right. Both Pubchem and Chemical Abstracts have the non-polymeric structure, though. Thanks. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Poison12346

Hello, person, as I clearly stated, I am Poison12346 and I wanted to get my account name out there. Why is there a Wikipedia of smosh and Fred but I can't put my account up here? If you want some sort of proof that it's really me, just ask for some and I'll provide it. I just don't think you should have the right to delete an article without any proof of why it shouldn't be up there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HarryPotter013 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has notability criteria for inclusion which you can read here: Wikipedia:Notability. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Hollywoodnorth spam report

Hi, if you have doubts about my report, please let me know what the concern is. My report is not a personal issue, this is a clear abuser. His retaliation for my reports is rather personal though, but that is to be expected. Spamicide (talk) 13:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't consider what either of you are doing as vandalism, so I don't think it was appropriate for you to list each other at WP:AIV. At first glance, there does appear to be self-promotion with Hollywoodnorthreport, so your report at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam is the way to go. If you think additional involvement of administrators is necessary, you can make a note at the administrator's noticeboard: WP:AN. AIV is really just for blatant vandalism that requires immediate blocking, not for more complicated issues. I hope this helps. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I thought after all his warnings, both by me and other users months ago, and diffs like this: [3]

[4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14]

That it would be considered blatant. Anyway, he started kicking and screaming and is following me all over talk pages, so my concern was that the report was dismissed prematurely because of that. Now that I know you did consider the report, I will bring it to WP:AN. Thanks :) Spamicide (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

this user is going out of there way to prove a point to me. I don't know what it is as I have not done anything wrong and have tried to talk with them. They even admitted that this is a SECONDARY wiki account that they use. Is that ok to do? why not show yourself and your clear agenda.....Hollywoodnorthreport (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC).

Using multiple accounts is not completely forbidden, as noted at WP:SOCK. As I note above, at first glace it does appear that there are some conflict-of-interest issues with your editing, which is clearly what Spamicide is taking issue with. I would recommend to both of you seeking dispute resolution: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

if I was a spammer I would be long gone. I'm a user just like you and Ed. Yes lets try to mediate this by ourselves or via dispute resolution....I posted a response to your comments on my talk page. Cheers Hollywoodnorthreport (talk)