User talk:Materialscientist

Please leave your message at the bottom of this page. 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 {{talkback}} template or quote the previous message.

Impact factors and infoboxes

Hi, I noticed that you updated several IFs, but then also removed this from the body of the text, together with what often is the only independent reference that an article has. Please don't do this. An infobox provides a rapid overview of what is in the article. And while we don't repeat basic bibliographic info (ISSN, OCLC, etc), it is no problem to say something about an IF. In addition, the reference avoids the article being tagged for having no independent references or no references at all. As for ranking info, that can easily be updated at the same time that an IF is updated and there is no need to remove that info either. Thanks. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 06:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

In practice, having a duplicate in the body is bad because it is easy to miss it during updates. I don't see a difference between the impact factor and other infobox parameters - they are all assigned by some authority. In other words, the reference to Journal Citation Reports is a dummy, because there can be no other source for the impact factors (in reality impact factors are issued by ISI - no-one may or can "calculate" them), and it is not possible to directly link to that database. Materialscientist (talk) 07:12, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I disagree. There's a fundamental difference between an ISSN and an IF. The former is just assigned in a kind of arbitrary way (it says something about which publisher or something like that, but otherwise doesn't convey any info), but the IF is something that is calculated by a reliable source. That you or I cannot independently redo those calculations is immaterial. And even though one cannot directly link to the database, neither can we do that for a print source and we can still use that as a reference and the JCR certainly is a reliable source. Putting in those references has been a lot of work and provides needed sourcing to journal articles, so I'd really appreciate if you would not remove them. Thanks! --Guillaume2303 (talk) 09:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Impact factors are assigned by the ISI and no-one else (yes, sort of calculated, but in a non-transparent way). Thus adding a ref "Journal Citation Reports 2011" is not "a lot of work"; it could be done by a bot and is simply redundant. Materialscientist (talk) 09:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I find that a strange reasoning. So each time there's only one possible source for something, we don't cite it? And the refs are usually much more detailed than "JCR 2011" and go something like: "<ref name=WoS>{{cite book |year=2012 |chapter=JOURNALNAME |title=2010 [[Journal Citation Reports]] |publisher=[[Thomson Reuters]] |edition=Science |accessdate=2012-06-29 |series=[[Web of Science]] |postscript=.}}</ref>". I don't see what is redundant about this. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:04, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

When there is only one source, and the data are integrated into the infobox, that source can be simply included into the infobox or impact factor wikilink. The ref above is incorrect. Journal Citation Reports is not a book. It is a regularly updated electronic database. It has no sections/chapters/editions - instead, specific datasets can be extracted from it through search menus provided by the interface. Thus the output table/page depends on the input. Materialscientist (talk) 10:12, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but that is all wrong. The JCR has been around for a long time and for most of it existence, it was a print publication. One volume (or book, or whatever you want to call it) was (and still is) produced annually. It contains for each included journal a section that present the different citation metrics (impact factor, immediacy index, etc), together with details on their calculation. For different fields (Neuroscience, Archeology, etc) it has a chapter that presents tables with rankings based on these different metrics, containing only the journals that are included in that specific category. I don't know whether ISI still produces the print edition, but the JCR still is organized in the same way. And even though it now has online search possibilities that permit you to, say, list all journals whose titles start with "A", the journals are still basically organized by categories. So, yes, I think a category is a "chapter" of the "book" JCR. This goes even more so for the individual "chapters" about the journals, because there you cannot modify the content by formulating your query different. For each journal the same information is displayed in the same way. So its not like PubMed, where the list of articles depend on which keywords you enter. It really is a book, just that nowadays it is in electronic form, much like encyclopedias for centuries were books and only recently have gone online (and you wouldn't call WP a "database", now would you?) By the way, having said all this, I don't think things would be much different if JCR really was a database, it would still be a reliable source and citable. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 20:53, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

<indent>Sorry, I can't make time for a proper answer. Indeed, the entries for individual journals are chapter-like, but impact factors can be retrieved as various tables through search queries - this is what I meant by database. A reference "Journal Citation Reports XXX" will suffice, as indeed, JCR is absolutely reliable, but I believe this should be integrated into the infobox (e.g. as a link to the impact-year). I'll have a look at the formulas they give on monday, but there is an obvious trick to them: while the formulas are trivial math, the crucial variable (number of cites) is basically defined by the ISI (they've got various "correction" procedures, and simply taking citations by year from WoS won't give the impact factors). Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 12:37, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The trick is not all that difficult. For years I was EIC of a journal myself and every year I was able to predict our IF within 1 or 2 decimal points. The corrections are made by looking at citations with typos in them. These don't get assigned to the correct article in the Science Citation Index database. So you first use "search" to get all "correct" citations (you can use the citation analysis tool for that) and then use the "cited reference search" and only look at the unlinked references and manually count the numbers of citations. Then you combine the two searches and you come pretty close to what the JCR gives. Discrepancies occur if there are citations with typos in the journal name (ISI finds them, we can, too, but it's a lot of work) or when counting the number of "citeable articles" in a given year (sometimes it's debatable whether an item is going to count as "editorial" or "article"). If there are a lot of these cases, the discrepancy between estimated and "real" IF can become quite large, of course. However calculated, the IF is a unique value assigned by a reliable source and should be referenced. And although the references I have placed in many articles all look pretty much the same (but so do references to, say Encyclopedia Britannica), they are not identical. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

JCR is the customary source, but they are not "absolutely reliable". There is a good deal of possible variation over how impact factors should be calculated. The definition is due to Eugene Garfield specifically, not ISI in general, and ISI calculates them on the basis of its particular range of journals and assumptions. A. The basic assumption for the classical impact factor is its 2-year basis for citations. (thus the wording impact, not influence--it measure the initial effect,) This fits very well fields like molecular biology, but not fields with longer citation patterns. So in fact, ISI also calculates a 5-uear impact factor. It is also possible to use their data and calculate for any arbitrary time basis--the explanatory material in JCR explains in detail how to do so. B.The factor is not a reflection of the total universe of potential citing journals in the world, but of those particular journals that have been chosen for the JCR set. Citations appearing elsewhere do not affect the JCR facto . Thus the IFs are gross underestimates for journals that may be included, but which are primarily cited by other journals the ISI does not cover, as for most third world journals. Though a Chinese language journal may be included, most of the citation on it will be from other Chinese journals that are not included. Therefore, both China and Japan also calculate national-based impact factors for their journals. (The ISI IF however does have validity, if it is taken as measuring the immediate influence upon the world wide core scientific community. )C. It is not necessarily obvious what is a citable item. The basis does not include items in journals such as editorial introductions and announcements which would not ordinarily be cited anywhere--this can be quite large in some journals. If they are not totally excluded, the impact factor will be lower than it would be if a narrow definition is chosen. D. journals Published in multiple editions need the citations combined if the scientific contents are the same. ISI attempts to do this, but their completeness varies. E The IF of a journal is affected by the proportion of review papers it publishes, because these normally have considerably higher citations. The pure review journals thus have very high IFs, but many journals have a few such papers. Again, ISI gives directions for eliminating this variation, though few people do so. (the most prevalent fraudulent manipulation of IFs is not self-citation --whose effect can, btw, also be measured--, but the addition of a few commissioned review papers to an otherwise primary journal.) F.There are also the errors that Guillaume mentions.

Additionally, I consider JCR impact factors when given as raw numbers without consideration of subject to be utterly meaningless. They were never intended as numbers valid across the entire range of subjects, but only for comparing journals of a certain type within a particular subject having uniform citation pattens. There's been an immense amount of work by various people trying to normalize this: there is no totally accepted standard, the most widely used is the so-called Eigenfactors they & Scopus publish. I always give the data by saying "the Impact factor for 20xx, as calculated by JCR, is x.xx, placing the journal nth within the m journals in the field of whatever. The citation needs to be to the database as a whole. (I have been customarily assuming the 2-year IF, which is relevant to most of experimental biology, but probably I should start saying so specifically. I think it wrong to give then umber without citation. It is a number calculated in a particular way, not an observable fact of nature. (I should mention that Garfield & ISI are well aware of all this--his collected works, online, discuss all of the variation and interpretation problems. He has always written against naïve use of the data. There have been universities --and countries--saying that the only papers that count for funding are those published in journals of IF about a certain value (one value I've seen is 1.5) for all fields. This is nonsense. ).

For WP, I therefore think that the numbers should be given , cited, in text. That we also give them in the infoboxes is in my opinion pandering to those who use the numbers without understanding. That opinion has not been generally accepted here, so I do add them to the boxes when I write a journal article. Infoboxes need to be consistent. I hope the Wikidata project will lead to greater uniformity within and between the different wikipedias. DGG ( talk ) 16:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

PoO2

How's the polonium dioxide GAN? Double sharp (talk) 09:15, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Uranium

Regarding fallout from atomic bombs, I think that the current version of the article is somewhat misleading. I saw your edit summary. While I am aware of a few pure uranium bombs being detonated, the vast majority of bombs used Pu as the main fission fuel. I recall reading that about 20 % of the fission occurs in the uranium tamper so the vast majority of the fission is of Pu. While Pu is a daughter of U-239, I think that the text is misleading. Of the big H-bombs I do not think that any went for the highest power design which would be a fission primary followed by a fusion secondary inside a U-238 tube to give a fission-fusion-fission design.Dr Mark Foreman (talk) 22:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

As I understood that section upon a brief look yesterday, its purpose was just to say that measurable amounts of uranium in nature originated from nuclear tests and nuclear accidents. This seems factual. Uranium isotopes were not a major product, and this can be briefly mentioned, but is not the topic of that article. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 00:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Admin?

Are you? If so, should Philcha's talk page be protected too as he's gone? Thanks. Atum World There's an Acadia for that too! 03:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Vanriperandnies (talk · contribs)

Hi, Materialscientist. I had blocked this user with a username soft block immediately antcedent to your message on their talk. If you would like me to unblock, please leave a message here. I won't get in your way if you want to take another path. Regards Tiderolls 04:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Glad to see you around. My current habits are these: (i) I am fine with extension of any of my blocks - no need to ask (unless this is a regular contributor, but I very rarely block those). (ii) When I meet inappropriate username, I warn and/or wait to see their intentions, and then either hardblock or softblock. I don't softblock (allowing account creation) right away because this may not resolve potential problems. (This is why I warned Vanriperandnies). Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 05:17, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I will unblock and leave a note of my own. Tiderolls 05:20, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Gerald Anderson

I hope you won't mind, but I need help on taking care of some fanboy who keeps on pushing his BLPvio edits, despite myself trying to clean things up to a more decent state. --Blake Gripling (talk) 10:45, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism of Saimaa Canal 1 July 2012

I was unaware that if I vandalize Wikipedia, I would get blocked from editing. So Cluebot NG automatically reverted the edit and I put this nonsense on to this webpage again just to take samples. Then, a couple of minutes later the information got removed and I got blocked from editing for 24 hours. I want to apologise for the vandalism that happened yesterday and I will never vandalize pages again. I want to edit many articles and with some references and brief descriptions. 2.122.108.251 (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Have you considered getting an account? It is very useful for editing. Also, I believe it is much eassier to edit than editing with only an IP address. In any case, welcome to Wikipedia. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Block request

Could you block JulianArbi for edit warring and ignoring NPOV warnings at Andrea Hirata? I'm too involved. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Block evasion

Block history

The above IP is in fact User:Yryriza. The IP's block just expired and they posted this on my Talk page. Please reinstate the block. If there's a more effective way of handling Yryriza (WP:ABK?), that would be great, but, as far as I know, they keep coming back with the same IP address. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales

Did you really protect this page, because it is still editable. I suggest that you protect it more, but before you do so it is probably best to get rid of the text that says you can edit it, because then it will look a bit silly. I agree that the page should be protected though, there has been to much vandalism from today. 178.16.9.51 (talk) 18:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protect Higgs boson for a few more days?

..getting sick of reverting all the silly anon vandelism... Cheers! Woz2 (talk) 01:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

31.6.53.218

Hey, just so you know, the IP is a sock of Rinpoche, and a whole range was just recently blocked because of them. Would you be able to up the block length in light of this? Thanks!

Thanks, WilliamH has already blocked 31.6.53.0/24 for 6 months while I was offline. Materialscientist (talk) 02:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't even realize it was part of the range. Sorry about that! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for reverting the last edits. I just wanted to let you know, 81.17.18.201 is a proxy out of Pakistan. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I thought so, but couldn't find any evidence except for behavioral (entry mechanism). Materialscientist (talk) 22:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Rinpoche has been using really standard edit summaries, but the string of numbers and letters right after it is a dead giveaway. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Do we know his geographical base, and whether it is stable? Materialscientist (talk) 23:22, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

He is operating out of the UK, and France, with a lot of airports as the location of his work. According to Ottava, he is using proxies that pretty much all locate to Pakistan (the latest one confirms this, and it seems to be something rather historical up until now), although he did use one from New Jersey a few days ago (a 216 range). Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:47, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Postgraduate School

The acronym of the schools refers to italian name, not english name.--Henry233 (talk) 10:19, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

FYI

184.161.10.194 was also reported to WP:ANI here. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 23:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Bismuth

I changed the linked word into rhombohedral. Clearly it redirects to page Trigonal crystal system. Is this OK now? The picture is OK (unchanged)? An overview is at Template:Infobox element/crystal structure image. -DePiep (talk) 05:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, seems Ok upon a brief look. There is much confusion in the literature where many authors look into the space group, find a 3-fold symmetry axis, and think it is a trigonal/hexagonal class. The lead of trigonal crystal system partly explains the origin of the confusion. While it is not wrong to call the rhombohedral system a (more general) trigonal system, most crystallography-minded sources don't do that. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 05:28, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Higgs boson

Protection was just taken off and the vandalism is starting again. Any chance you can semi-prot again? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 06:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 06:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Disagree with protection on the Higgs article. There are valid contributions to be made by non-registered users. If you'll notice, many of the edits being reverted are those being made by registered users anyway. Please remove protection; you are alienating a valuable portion of the Wikipedia community when you do this.Sumostorm (talk) 08:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia article contributions . But I recently edit Higgs Boson about it's nomenclature( Higgs Boson --Higgs name came from Peter Higgs , And Boson came from DR Satyendra Nath Bose.) . But you reject the modification.. Kindly consider that modification.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mishra866868 (talk • contribs) 09:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC) Thanks for your message..Mishra866868 talk —Preceding undated comment added 09:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	okay I agree but please include the name of bose,as he was the man to startf the theory Anurag Chakraborty 06:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

please include the name of bose as well — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nentu (talk • contribs) 10:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

File:DecayChain Ununseptium.svg

Could you please redraw the image in the style of File:Ununoctium-294 nuclear.svg so that it will be OK for WP to use? It was a nice addition to the Uus article when it was there. Double sharp (talk) 11:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Double sharp (talk) 12:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

3 months since Yobot was blocked

How do we proceed with this? Was there any progress done by the discussions so far? -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

174.84.205.226

Hi Materialscientist! Because you recently blocked 174.84.205.226 for mass genre-warring, and because I had to revert an additional fifteen instances of this yesterday (with no AIV report), and because I now see that this IP has again continued the same activity on at least five additional articles today, I'm wondering if you have any suggestions about what should be done next.  -- WikHead (talk) 18:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

please join wikiproject backpacking

Request for extended Ghana article protection

Hi, Materialscientist, it has been quite a while since we last spoke. What I wanted from you Materialscientist is a big favor. Materialscientist please would it be possible if you can extend the Ghana Wikipedia article protection for 1 more month so that I can sort out the few remaining issues with the article (see here Talk:Ghana#First_reading) which is stopping the Ghana article from being promoted to a "Good article" status. I am going to sort out the issues with the Ghana article so that it can be passed for a "Good article". The Ghana article is just a few "twitches of work" away from being classed as a "Good article" and it would take me approximately 1 month to sort out the remaining issues with the Ghana article that has stopped the Ghana article from being passed as a "Good article". The Ghana article would need to be "protected" while I sort these issues out, because Materialscientist, please believe me that if the Ghana article is not "protected", it would be very difficult for me to work on the article in "peace" because as soon as the article is "un-protected" on approximately 17:15, 7 July 2012, which is today, it would completely be "vandalized to shredders" and would loose its closeness to being crowned as a "Good article". So please Materialscientist, I am pleading with you, can you please protect the Ghana article for 1 more month or however long you believe the Ghana article should be "protected" for, so that I can get the Ghana article "promoted" to a "Good article", as the Ghana article does deserve to be crowned a "Good article". My sincere regards -- MarkMysoe (talk) 17:14, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

81.108.7.13

The IP 81.108.7.13 which you blocked for 31 hours earlier due to vandalism has inferred that they would vandalise again after the block. Visit their talk page to see what I mean. Maybe a longer block would be necessary although that is your judgement — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheIrishWarden (talk • contribs) 20:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Abouth the Earth

Apart from astonishing me ;-), could you easily mass-revert me? (see my talk). -DePiep (talk) 23:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Troller69max (talk · contribs) on WP:AIV

Hi Materialscientist, sorry I removed my report at AIV just after you saw it. Put it back if you want, just thought I'd let you know. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:58, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

A request

Hello Materialscientist. I have a request at User talk:Bmusician that needs to be done quickly; seeing as you are active at the moment, do you have several minutes to fulfill this request? Thanks, →Bmusician 07:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		You are always serving the community (in fact you deal with most of my reports) and are unafraid of carrying out possibly contraversial actions to protect the Wiki. Thank you :), Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

User:65.9.15.105 abusing talk page

Hi MS. The ip editor you recently blocked, User:65.9.15.105, is abusing his talk page access by removing the active block notice, and blanking the page or inserting dummy text. AIV isn't really appropriate for amending his block. Would it be possible for you to remove his talk page access for the day, or to refer me to the most appropriate noticeboard to request it? Thanks.   — Jess· Δ♥ 23:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Materialscientist (talk) 23:03, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

You have mail

Hello, Materialscientist. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 07:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Block templates

Cannot us block a user who repeatedly vandalizing the page. Please tell new on Wikipedia. Dr.pragmatist (talk) 07:53, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for guidance. Dr.pragmatist (talk) 07:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Mauigold23

Looks to me like the autoblock is doing what it is supposed to, perhaps this one needs blocked too? Beeblebrox (talk) 05:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Risky - might be a shared IP. Given the meager information we've got, I would just decline the unblock request, as you did. Materialscientist (talk) 05:17, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

User:DreamMcQueen‎

Hey MS, when you get some time, would you mind taking a look at the above linked user's edits. From what I can see, the user perfer's his own version of how things should look, regardless if they are not the consensus version. He has broken 3RR on several pages, edit warring is ongoing on several, has been to ANI once for one of those edit wars and has broken an OTRS ticket/DCMA takedown at least once so far. Since I have very little patience for ANI most days (today being one) and really don't want to have go there, I was wondering if you could take a look at the edits and maybe have a word with the user. Thanks...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Need some help - are you online?

Could you please have a look at the two messages on my talk page from Toluaina (talk · contribs). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that :). I would usually have just said that but, silly really, a recent thing which is on ANI has thrown me a little, but not to worry I'll get over it. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Wwecenarules2

[1] has two accounts. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Personal attack on your talk page

Hi again I reverted a personal attack on your talk page, hope you don't mind. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

This IP Address

Thought I would let you know this IP address belongs to a College, I saw you sent it a message about malicious editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.28.254.57 (talk) 16:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

your rev on hydrogen

Talk:Hydrogen#Addition_to_Mettalurgy, Hi, can i have a proper explanation on this revert ? I think the provided ref is valid. Thanks. Mion (talk) 23:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Problem IP from a library

Resolved

User talk:209.212.5.67 Can anything be done about this IP from a public library? I haven't gone through all the edits, but it seems a common place to vandalize from. Feel free to ignore this post if it is trivial. I noticed you worked a lot on vandals so I thought I would post here and not bother that vandalism board.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:52, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Potential {{anonblock}}, but the frequency of edits is too low, and there are too many constructive edits from that IP. Materialscientist (talk) 01:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I just thought I would mention it, in case it is slipping through some cracks.--Canoe1967 (talk) 02:20, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	This is for reverting vandalism on Wikipedia, thanks Leeboy100 03:15, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

DNA query

• Please discuss at Talk:DNA#Arsenic instead of phosphorus. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:58, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Blocks

Thanks for the quick IP block on the date changer. Got a quick question for you. It occurred to me when I was reporting him that I was only assuming he had been out on a 3 month block. I couldn't find how long he'd been blocked anywhere. Is there an easy way or maybe you could take it to the administrators and have them include that info in the blocked box? Just a thought. Thanks again and I appreciate the quick responses. Kind regards, --Manway 05:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

If you click on "contributions" of any user or IP, in a top row there should be a tab "block log" that will lead to a list of blocks issued to that user/IP. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 05:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Perfect. Thanks again. --Manway 05:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Aam Janta Aam Janta

is becoming a tad irksome. Cheers (Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:17, 11 July 2012 (UTC)).

Indeed, thus blocked. Materialscientist (talk) 11:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

65.255.147.183 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

How about a block? That 1 revert of yours isn't going to help. AIV is useless as usual at this hour.--Atlan (talk) 09:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Can't block without ample warning - this looks more like editing conflict. Materialscientist (talk) 09:43, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Are you kidding me? Changing killer application to Supernumerary nipple isn't vandalism, but and content dispute?? What a joke. What about the vandalism to Hekatonkheires, Dakota Fanning, Níðhöggr and Hough Green? Is that also a content dispute? Yeah, better give a rampaging vandal who has been blocked for the same thing 3 times already (once by YOU for crying out loud) ample warning.--Atlan (talk) 10:18, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I see you actually left him an edit warring template. That'll show him.--Atlan (talk) 10:26, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Please refer to whatever you're talking about in my pasts edits. S2grand (talk) 16:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)s2grandS2grand (talk) 16:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Raspberry Ketone

Thanks for the "tidy" and helping to squash the constant bombardment of Direct Response Marketing site links. Cadillacula (talk) 18:46, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me, how do I talk to you about Esmeralda of Belgium's page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.42.253 (talk) 22:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

78.85.240.166

Hey you blocked the IP: 78.85.240.166 for vandalising my talk, I think that 24 hours is a bit short for what they did. The context they used is both a personal attack and foul language. I believe the block should have been at least 2 days. It's for you to decide, thanks. TheIrishWarden - Irish and proud (talk) 16:18, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

• Blocks are not sentences. There isn't some scale of offences. Uncle G (talk) 19:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my Talk Page. I appreciate it. Vertium When all is said and done 19:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

user:Mauigold23

I'm having trouble deciphering what's going on here but it looks as though a user you once blocked is causing some issues. Can you take a look at it, please? They've quickly rushed to a L4 warning for removing a speedy deletion template from an article they created. OlYeller21^Talktome 19:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

AIV Backlog

Hi! I'm on RC Patrol with you today and AIV has a large backlog, including 2 IP-hoppers, a spammer, and someone who vandalized my talk page after a level 4 warning. Would you mind helping out there? Thanks, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 20:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC).

Never mind, Edgar has it covered. Best, Electriccatfish2 (talk) 20:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC).

Qualitrol

Thanks. You got the last one. The gentleman in question had put in an entire article about Qualitrol and Danaher Corp. He used his real name, which pops up the fact that he is a marketing intern at Qualitrol.JSR (talk) 02:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I suspected a spam campagin, but didn't have time to investigate - many (if not most) scientists come here to promote something, thus I'm trying not to be overly harsh on that. Materialscientist (talk) 05:57, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be harsh. It was a concerted spam campaign.JSR (talk) 06:08, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

No slight to you. And I doubt we are dealing with a scientist here. Marketing people are different, and contrary to scientists hardly convert to wikipedians (I haven't seen any so far). Materialscientist (talk) 06:13, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

No offense taken. Have a good whatever time of day you are having.JSR (talk) 06:18, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Indef Semi-Protection Request

Could you Indef Semi-Protect this page in my userspace, please? Thanks...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:49, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Done. Materialscientist (talk) 06:13, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012 Study of authors of health-related Wikipedia pages

Dear Author/Materialscientist

My name is Nuša Farič and I am a Health Psychology MSc student at University College London (UCL). I am currently running a quantitative study entitled Who edits health-related Wikipedia pages and why? I am interested in the editorial experience of people who edit health-related Wikipedia pages. I am interested to learn more about the authors of health-related pages on Wikipedia and what motivations they have for doing so. I am currently contacting the authors of randomly selected articles and I noticed that someone at this address edited an article on Paracetamol. I would like to ask you a few questions about you and your experience of editing the above mentioned article and or other health-related articles. If you would like more information about the project, please visit my user page (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hydra_Rain) and if interested, please reply via my talk page or e-mail me on nusa.faric.11@ucl.ac.uk. Also, others interested in the study may contact me! If I do not hear back from you I will not contact this account again. Thank you very much in advance. Hydra Rain (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Strange page move

Does this page move make any sense to you? This occurred more than a year ago, and I am surprised no one noticed before now. I am currently looking at sorting out some redirects associated with characters on this show, and moving this article back to its original place makes sense to me. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 01:33, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

The Chemistry Barnstar

		The Chemistry Barnstar
		For your tireless and hard-working edits in chemistry related articles, I award you this barnstar.

extra999 (talk) 03:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Although the serious readership wishes that you would deal with real problems such as Plasma Physics, probably the greatest systematic threat to chemistry articles. He is running a massive editing project that proceeds with NO comments from you until others raise a red flag. Disappointing lapse, in my opinion.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:50, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I have to go with Smokefoot on this one also. Mr. Physics is running a strange program and needs to be curbed a bit.JSR (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Wanna organize your user page?

Wanna organize your user page? I can show you how. Tonymax469 (talk) 03:44, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Would be interesting. You can outline your idea in a sandbox. Materialscientist (talk) 03:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Belieber

Opinion of this article? I had tagged it with a CSD but removed it when I saw it was created last month. Seems like a made up term that does not merit inclusion in an encyclopedia. Your thoughts? I'll watch this page. Thanks, my friend. Regards, --Manway 04:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Higgs boson

Please take help from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/265088/Higgs-particle Thanks--♥ Kkm010 ♥ ^{♪ Talk ♪} ߷ _{♀ Contribs ♀} 05:31, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Vandal

FYI. I just left another warning on User talk:220.237.26.72, right behind one you left. Procedure wise, that's all I know to do. But I have to tell you this individual is beginning to alarm me just a bit. I just saw User_talk:Gobonobo#blah, which is an anonymous message left by that IP address. Maile66 (talk) 13:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

COI ref

I see you reverted a ref in Melatonin. Have you noticed that the same user has added refs to countless articles the last couple of days? --Hordaland (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Cruel Summer (GOOD Music album)

Would you be willing to take a look (and close) the CSD-G4 at Cruel Summer (GOOD Music album)? The template has been in place a couple hours and is attracting talk page comments that will just lead to disappointed editors. Odd that none of them have removed the template. Thank you, just reply here if you need. --Tgeairn (talk) 04:50, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The medicine article

Hi Material Scientist. I noticed that you recently reverted the addition of the word Pharmacia to the article medicine. Pharmacia is a word used in many places of the world in place of the word medicine and in all intents and purposes is a synonym. The edition of the word to the article medicine would help people find the article that they seek on the internet. If you have a better suggestion on how this word can be integrated into the article then placing it beside the word medicine then please do make suggestions. 2602:306:C518:62C0:1E75:8FF:FEBB:2125 (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

A quick internet search gives all sorts of negative connotations for the word pharmacia, mostly biblical, as well as the existence of a drug company named Pharmacia. I do not think this change would be useful.JSR (talk) 14:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Noted: This is where prudent action can quell such negative connotations. That is why it is necessary to create more references to the word Pharmakea in the context of Greek culture to quell the biblical dissidence on the internet with more favorable references to the art of medicine. Pharmacia is a word used in many places in the world and adding it to the article on medicine will help people find balanced information. 2602:306:C518:62C0:1E75:8FF:FEBB:2125 (talk) 14:44, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

A quick search in various Wikipedias give me references to Pharmacia the company and not much else. Can you supply references if the use is so widespread?JSR (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I will do my best. This has been my observation traveling the world. I was surprised to see the Greek word in use in many countries among the people. Rather then these people finding biblical references on the internet adding the word to the medicine article will help them get information that is more favorable. 2602:306:C518:62C0:1E75:8FF:FEBB:2125 (talk) 15:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Adding the word Pharmacia to the medicine article will push the medicine article to the top of the search engine for a search of pharmacia or pharmakea which is helpful. 2602:306:C518:62C0:1E75:8FF:FEBB:2125 (talk) 16:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Where in Windows do you find Greek character fonts?

Hi Material Scientist! I need to access the Greek character fonts. Could you please explain how to get these fonts in Windows? 2602:306:C518:62C0:1E75:8FF:FEBB:2125 (talk) 23:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Undid licensed content

Hi Material Scientist, You undid 3 of the edits I've made to pages and I just wanted to clarify this as I am new to Wikipedia. I understand copyright material is not allowed of course. However, we are licensed to use this content as a news site and the website I referenced is the license holder. Do we simply need to show proof of this license first? Or are licensed content holders still required to rewrite the material before posting on Wikipedia? I appreciate your clarification. --ML — Preceding unsigned comment added by Motivadalatina (talk • contribs) 23:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I might be able to help answer your questions. The first thing to note is that Wikipedia is not a news agency, so our style of writing here is a little different. In an encyclopedia, we aim for a more timeless style. For example, writing that something happened on "Monday" will mean very little two years from now, so writing "July 16, 2012" is better. With the main exception being short quotes, nearly all additions to Wikipedia should be rewritten in your own words. Zaereth (talk) 00:28, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Trouble at time

I am requesting immeadiate page protection for the article space and talk page at Time. It appears that an anonymous IP is vandalizing the talk page over at Talk:Time. You can see from the talk page edit history [2] that another editor attempted to remove the IP's personal attack(s) under WP:NPA at least five, maybe six times and the IP restored his comments. Now this person appears to be going crazy quoting a good portion of the WP:NPA and with inappropriate formating. Please see for yourself. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 07:46, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Please don't accept one POV about this. This is really about content and they are deleting more than even what they claim is WP:NPA. Shall we discuss it at AN/I? 70.109.183.229 (talk) 08:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what happened but the IP just restored their comments. (This person is going crazy). I reccomend page protection for the talk page, and I am guessing the article space will be their next target. They've been disruptive there in the recent past. Thanks. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 08:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind the comments and other stuff is gone -- let's see what happens. ---- 08:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for stepping in, MS. Nameless has used the following IPs since April:

70.109.183.229

70.109.182.232

71.169.187.182

71.169.190.235

71.169.190.154

71.169.176.253

71.169.179.168

71.169.176.73

--JimWae (talk) 08:18, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Just so you know, the anon has raised this at ANI and has mentioned your admin action. I'm just dropping a notification here Blackmane (talk) 10:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Unblock request of FG1010

Hello Materialscientist. FG1010 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, w^{L<speak·check>} 13:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Morelle Wiki Page

Forgot to add sources. articles are based on archived news articles covering the election fraud. you can search yourself for those articles. the section itself is a "verbatim print" of the two articles of the topic in question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.135.125 (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that makes it a copyright violation, so I've reverted it. Can you simply write a summary without directly quoting the attributed articles? Acroterion (talk) 21:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

The "meaningless statistic" on your user page

It can be changed from 100k+ to 200k+. Congratulations, and thanks for the good work! Chris the speller ^yack 02:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I thought the price of palladium in all currencies would be relevent to the page.....just like Kitco's link but more informative but I see that is ok. Strange. PURA Metal (talk) 05:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Requesting RevisionDelete

I noticed that you blocked User:210.51.38.14, however, the disruptive edits that the IP made were enough to possibly call for a RevDel of the edit summaries the edits contained. Please review Counterjihad's edit history for possible content requiring attention. Thanks! Michaelzeng7 (talk) 23:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Help with deleting my account

Wikipedia is getting boring and hard to edit. How do you take down a account? Don't do it for me, just telll me how. Oh, and will my edits stay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ticklewickleukulele (talk • contribs) 23:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

What is meant by "a vacuum"

Regarding your edit-war at special relativity about whether to use "the speed of light in vacuum" or "the speed of light in a vacuum":
People who are just learning about special relativity have no idea that there might be multiple possible types of vacuums. What they think of when one says "a vacuum" is a region of space which contains no matter. Obviously, there may be many such regions such as the contents of a flask from which all gas has been pumped out. Thus the use of the word "a" is appropriate here. JRSpriggs (talk) 05:53, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I see your point, but to me "vacuum" there is grammatically equivalent to "space" and doesn't need "a". I guess both ways (with and without a) are acceptable, and frankly, much of this ado was about editing style of 1Todd1: changing a stable FA; quoting another wiki article for that, and a reference to the (translated) book by Einstein, which actually uses "in vacuum" rather than "in a vacuum". Then copying my edit summary and using it where it does not apply. Materialscientist (talk) 06:04, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

The whole reason for saying "in vacuum" or "in a vacuum" is to make it clear that there is no matter present to change the refractive index from 1 to some other value. So equating "vacuum" with "space" in this context makes no sense. JRSpriggs (talk) 06:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Grammatically it does. It is equivalent to saying "speed of light in a liquid" (a required) or "speed of light in water" (not required). Materialscientist (talk) 06:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, I overlooked the word "grammatically" in your previous answer. Sorry. JRSpriggs (talk) 06:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

If I may help, the article "a" is used to denote an unspecified noun, so "in a vacuum" can mean either a total or a partial vacuum, or a vacuum pump. If we used the article "the" instead, that would denote a specified noun, and would need more info specifying which noun. So if I wrote "the speed of light in the vacuum," I would need to tell you whether I'm talking about the vacuum of space, or the vacuum cleaner. However, if I write it without an article, this denotes an absolute, so it is clear when I say "the speed of light in vacuum" that I am talking about total vacuum. This is similar to saying "the speed of light in a glass" versus "the speed of light in borosilicate." Zaereth (talk) 07:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

178.37.76.95

Suggest you extend the block on 178.37.76.95 to the talk page as well - see the page's edit history. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Gadfium beat me to it. Materialscientist (talk) 08:53, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Help please

Can you help me to edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Materialhandler (talk • contribs) 10:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Overwhelming.

I saw what you posted and that was a lot. Did you copy that from somewhere? I just want some personal assistance from somebody. The tutorial has so many links, its hard to follow without getting sidetracked. I want to know, should I just go to some page and look for mistakes, or should I try to follow what other people try to correct or should I ask someone else who might be able to give me some spcific direction. I just want to be a good editor. Please help me.--Materialhandler (talk) 10:26, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Please note discussion at WP:COIN

The activities of Sebastio Venturi are being discussed here. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 13:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

structure of MnF4

Article(s): Fluorine, Manganese(IV) fluoride

Request: Create an illustration for the MnF4 structure. See para in "Fluorine" for context. I would like it for two reasons: (1) the discussion is complex and a graphic will help people (especially non-technical ones) feel more comfortable and (2) it is sort of different than the chains and lattices shown.

In terms of the appearance, I would like something showing "octahedra" (since they are referred to in the text) and showing a ring of 4 of them. Perhaps use a dashed "circle" to emphasize the ring-ness. I am really more concerned with something a little cartoonish that illustrates the text than making sure we have a complete unit cell or the like.

Here is only non-free illo I could find [3]. It's quite nice in that it shows the octahedra, but also the little knobs of atoms at the vertices (think about the non chemical reader). But in addition, I would like the dashed circle added for the reader to see ring-ness emphasized.

I don't have crystal structure date, but perhaps you can research it (I am really not a purist on that sort of thing, but feel free if you are). Here is a reference: [4].

TCO (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

P.s. I prefer aspect ratio that is "wide and short" if it does not otherwise hurt the image (fits better in text wrap).

Graphist opinion(s):

What about images drawn by Ben? In this case, we use the same datafile (no alternatives), just different drawing programs. Materialscientist (talk) 01:41, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Ben hooked me up. I'm good. I could use a superstar like you on that F piping though...;-) TCO (talk) 01:44, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

explanatory sketch of F2 research piping station

For Fluorine, please draw a diagram that shows F2 research handling station. Not really sure what I want, but show the valves and cold trap and just the linear manifold and all.

See the para within Fluorine. Also this photo. And explanation. The enclosure with remote valve shuttof is quite interesting as is the placing it in a hood. Of course it is just one uni's method, but it seems state of the art (and I'll add a citation to their web page).

Maybe letters indicating materials (with legend). or just labels in drawing? Donno. Could probably strip out some of the scaffolding and other stray stuff for simplicity.

Also there is this classic diagram in Shriver Inorganic Chem page 427.

TCO (talk) 18:53, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Synthesis of Pharmaceuticals

Hi Material Scienrist!!! Having a good day I hope. It is very impotamt to know how various pharmaceuticals espectially those used by psychiatrist are synthesized all the way down to their root bulding blocks or root precursers. Please, what do you know about this? 2602:306:C518:62C0:1C66:AFF5:5F43:10F3 (talk) 02:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Those are usually proprietary (i.e. secret).--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:25, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Synthesis of Pharmaceuticals

Hi Material Scientist!!!!!! Wikipedia articles on pharmaceuticals sound like sales pitches for taking these chemicals and there is nothing on how these pharmaceuticals were made or synthesized. It would be very nice if you would do research on the subject and even write letters to the various pharmaceutical corporations demanding information on these many drugs and how they are manufactured and sythesized all the way down to their root chemicals. If you can't get enough information from the pharmaceutical company on how chemcials they used to make their pharmaceuticals were manufactured inquire about where they get the chemicals to manufacture their drugs so you can inquire from the chemical corporation on how these chemicals were synthsised. Wikipedia needs this information in the articles so explain the chemistry of these pharmaceuticals and how they were made. For instance it is not enough to say that Phenothiazine pharmaceuticals are made from phenothiazine. How was phenothiazine itself synthesized and from what chemcials? Also I read that many drugs are manufactured from the waste of bacteria, even genetically engineered bacteria. How was this done and what chemicals are used to seperate the waste from the bacteria and how if any was it modified chemically and with what chemicals and how were those chemical sythesized? What medicines are made from petrochemicals or pepared with the aid of petrochemicals and how were these chemicals sythesized? I don't like reading sales pitches for taking pharmaceuticals. I want to know how they were made and where they came from. 2602:306:C518:62C0:D417:21DE:B0D:EA20 (talk) 22:55, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Why was my IP blocked? It made locating my login details quite difficult until I realised that I had forgotten a capitialisation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danmas1986 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello

As the [Top still-active contributor] to the Wikipedia Article on Salinity, I thought you could help me out with List of bodies of water by salinity. While I did indeed start the article and edit it somewhat it appears that sometime in the past few months someone has changed it from parts-per-thousand to percentages. If you would please let me know which is actually correct and, if you care to, let me know if theres any ways I should change the article? Thanks in advance! Ncboy2010 (talk) 11:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

All I know is that percents are preferred in science, but parts per thousand are historically kept in some areas, including salinity, some geological topics, etc. One has to look into (Google) books and ask other editors. Materialscientist (talk) 11:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Alright, thank you so much! Ncboy2010 (talk) 12:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your good job as an administrator.

Well done Materialscientist, you are making good progress with your constructive edits, and well, blocking mainly IP addresses from editing. I hope this goes on for the next few months. Thanks! 2.216.191.10 (talk) 11:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Opinion

Could you opine on this this matter. Regards AdabowtheSecond (talk) 18:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Incest

Hello, I modified the article on "incest" to remove the section under the heading "inbreeding": Children of parent-child or sibling-sibling unions are at increased risk compared to cousin-cousin unions. Studies suggest that 20-36% of these children will die or have major disability due to the inbreeding.[13]

This statement is inaccurate and is also not supported by the reference. In fact, that reference is not one of a study at all but a book that appears to be anthropology. It should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.2.102 (talk) 22:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Dragonfly Photo Edit

So? Why was the new photo removed? I'm curious... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bune (talk • contribs) 23:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

FYI

129.21.84.69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) See deleted edits, too. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Roger Federer "widely considered to be the greatest player of all time" dispute

Hi MS. Could you please read this talk page discussion on Roger Federer and reply to it with your opinion? It's all about one matter. Is the statement that Federer is "widely considered to be the greatest player of all time" appropriate on Wikipedia? Or does it violate WP:WEASEL and other guidelines? It is in the opening sentence of the article. Thank you. --76.189.114.243 (talk) 11:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Aabomycin

Can you add to this? I salvaged it from speedy. Albomycin might be the other name and have more hits.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I can't write well about this topic. Edgar181 tidied the article and it seems Ok. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 04:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Abuse

Why'd you remove the report i made against (CA)Giacobbe?--Golfballz (talk) 00:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Not me but the robot named HBC AIV helperbot7. This happens when a report is malformatted. As I recall, this was more of editing conflict than obvious vandalism, but I haven't looked into details. Materialscientist (talk) 00:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

IPv6 block

Hey Materialscientist, do you think you can block 2602:304:413F:24F9:E9BC:BB48:4829:CF9C (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for copyright violations. You warned him before I reverted his edit. Thanks. -- Luke (Talk) 02:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Blocking

Hello Materialscientist,

Thanks for the help with the blocks lately. I thought I would just let you know that I added the appropriate block tag to User talk:170.65.218.6‎, a user who you blocked.

Regards, Gold Standard 05:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Ammonia?

Hello Mr. Materialscientist!

I really don't think that I have edited some parts from the Ammonia article or is just because I have never been logged in on that day. Besides, I'm not from Pangasinan. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nonhacker2012 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	The best. AIV runs like a machine because of your leadership there. Doc talk 06:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

A disruptive IP user

Hello, Materialscientist. Would it be okay if you checked out the situation concerning 98.234.134.32? He's one of those genre warriors, and he's been given many warnings against such behavior, including two "final warnings". I submitted a report about him/her at WP:AIV. Thank you. Backtable ^{Speak to me}_{concerning my deeds.} 22:26, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

User talk:58.106.163.11

You blocked this IP for 24 hours (now expired) for BLP violations at Joy Behar. A request was made at WP:BLPN ([5]) to WP:REVDEL the diffs, I assume under WP:CFRD#2 (grossly offensive). Another user brought the BLPN discussion to my attention on my Talk page.

Because I'm newly adminted, I'd like to know if you think a revdel is warranted in these circumstances. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Revdel is left at the discretion of administrators. I have a high threshold, and delete only clearly offensive edit summaries, also libel, egregious personal attacks and/or outing in edit texts. Tons of edits like those from 58.106.163.11 come daily, and my priority is to catch and revert them (we fail at that). Materialscientist (talk) 23:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I tend to agree. I think really offensive edit summaries are far worse than really offensive text changes to the article. Otherwise, we'd be revdeling way too many changes where people are called all sorts of offensive names. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• Hi Materialscientist, I would like you to take a look at this article and approve it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahid_Barelvi. I have added 10 Authentic/Verifiable references and some updated information to this article, it did not have a single reference and was posted by its writer as a Stub. I will be looking forward to your reply Thanks -  — SameStruggle  5:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Another photography question

Hi Materialscientist,

I have a question regarding a new camera I have. The camera displays its logo on the upper right-hand corner of the picture. I have been cropping this out, but this also removes temperature info and date stamps, which can be useful. As I recently found out, with this image, when I make a mistake and forget to crop, uploading new versions is a huge pain. My question is, is it sometimes OK to leave the logo on the photo? Zaereth (talk) 22:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Most cameras have an option (buried somewhere) to not place such tags, but this might be some proprietary camera. You can always "play dumb" and upload photos as they are, pretending you are not proficient in image processing - the image license allows others to modify them (e.g. remove watermark without cropping). This tag doesn't look too bad. Materialscientist (talk) 22:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

No such options with this unit, unfortunately. It's a bit of a cheap model, but more than adequate for the actual work I use it for. I'll try to remember to crop it first and, maybe, play dumb if it ever comes up. Thanks for the advice. Zaereth (talk) 23:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Rhodium

Hi, are you don't like my image: ? Or was it only just a mistake? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:58, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Re-added. Not a mistake, just too little space. Maybe crop this image a bit? Materialscientist (talk) 09:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem :-) and thanks. A crop ... hm, the "feeling" and the "size effect" can be lost. This image is a crop too. We have other pure technical images from Rh. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:49, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

For your information

Seems someone is up to no good. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 22:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

?

Hi there! I just saw that you undid a long edit that I did a day or few ago. What did you mean I had unreliable sources? I posted a link to a video of the person (Lacey Sturm, the page in question) telling the same exact story. :S Perhaps I'm missing something in this picture? IStew14 (talk) 23:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm being bold!

• Commented out unhelpful image and remarks. The image and the above remark was not related to helping to build an encyclopedia. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 04:30, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Images

Great Brodsky images. Thanks Span (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

This account is blocked

Can you unblock FG1010? He is just someone on my network. (61.94.162.135 (talk) 12:33, 28 July 2012 (UTC))

Abundance

You have no idea the difference between the difference between the abundance of a substnce
1. Vs. number of atoms or molecules, or 2. Vs. the measurable mass. Silicon dioxide is clearly the most abundant substance on the surface of the Earth as a function of mass. Silicon dioxide is a dense substance, and it is a major consitutent of sand, soil, quartz, granite, and several other minerals. There are huge amounts of silicon dioxide on the surfaces of Eurasia, North America, South America, Africa, Australia, and the major islands of the world.
Probably the next most abundant substance on the surface of the Earth is aluminum dioxide.
Water might be barely in third place.
98.67.110.231 (talk) 03:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Request for deleting userpages

Dear Materialscientist, please delete my user page and talk page. Valchemishnu^ʘ 05:08, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Valchemishnu^ʘ 05:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Vanessa Johansson

Please, how do I stop repeated sabotage against the Vanessa Johansson article, where someone is removing a large chunk of text about her films, without simply starting an editing war? --Folkfellow (talk) 17:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Subpage

Please delete my sub page too (User:Valchemishnu/Sandbox). I missed it last, sorry. Its not actually a real sandbox as the first letter is capital. Thanks in advance. Valchemishnu^ʘ 03:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

129.21.69.140

Heads up, This user is creating pages using a template that assert that they are sock puppets of you. Unsure of how to handle this. Jschnur (talk) 06:07, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Bongwarrior has ‎already blocked that IP. Materialscientist (talk) 06:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Banned user spamming talk page

The user ADVANFORT is spamming his/her own talk page after being blocked from editing. --Vincent Liu (something to say?) 11:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Revoked access to talk page. Materialscientist (talk) 11:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Solder page edits

Hello, I see that you have undone my edits to the Wikipedia "Solder" page - I had removed any reference to Indalloy. I did this because it is inappropriate for the company Indium to promote/advertise their product on an informational Wikipedia page. Elizabethnorton (talk) 16:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The No Spam Barnstar
	For removing countless spam from user pages. Vincent Liu (something to say?) 08:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	sr. your photos are great! Iskander HFC (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for blocking the VOA account with the gibberish username! Electric Catfish 00:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, the account is abusing its talk page access (see history) by putting gibberish on the talk page itself, so can you please revoke talk page access, as well? Thanks, Electric Catfish 00:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC).

I see you did it already. Thanks! Electric Catfish 00:54, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Bot protecting DYK images

At exactly what point is the bot supposed to protect an image on Commons that is a DYK lead? When it's moved from prep to a queue or from queue onto the main page? PumpkinSky talk 20:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't know, better ask Krinkle on Commons. He changed the bot routine from the original Commons:Bots/Requests/KrinkleBot_(2) (it obviously won't satisfy DYK). By observation, I guess the bot frequently checks the queues and protects images found there. I blame KrinkleBot's failures to maintenance works at the Toolserver, which were relatively frequent in the past months. Materialscientist (talk) 22:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Yea the bot doesn't seem to work too well.PumpkinSky talk 22:32, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Template use

You don't mind me using the template of your border on your Userpage? WolfShadow9192 (talk) 08:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Go ahead (though I don't understand what border :). Materialscientist (talk) 08:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Arboform

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

220.255.2.*

Hi Matsci, thanks for this. Have you checked the other IP's? I was about add .22 to the list, but the entry was bot-removed. Here's today's list:

220.255.2.22 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

220.255.2.21 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

220.255.2.30 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

220.255.2.33 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

220.255.2.49 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

220.255.2.25 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

220.255.2.58 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

Did you consider a rangeblock? Cheers - DVdm (talk) 11:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

This how I've blocked them. I'm checking their contributions further right now and will probably extend the block. This editing pattern is common for Singapore - very rapid IP hopping, multiple edits. It is annoying, but such attacks are brief, and in the long term contributions are constructive. Materialscientist (talk) 11:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I was looking at the block logs of the IP's and didn't find anything. I guess that rangeblocks show themselves elsewhere. Is there a special page where rangeblocks get listed? - DVdm (talk) 12:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Click on "contribs" of any IP in question. Then "Current blocks" at the bottom. Cheers and thanks for reverting (these ultrafast hoppers are notoriously difficult to revert). Materialscientist (talk) 12:06, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Very nice. Thanks, cheers and keep up the good work! - DVdm (talk) 12:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Philadelphia University

Hi, Materialscientist. I wonder if you'd take a look at the recent history of this article and see if you think semi-protection is warranted. Multiple IPs keep reinserting unsourced content, using misleading edit summaries copied from my reverts. I'm not going to revert again and am feeling too ill today to go jump through hoops at WP:RPP. Thanks. Rivertorch (talk) 22:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

neutronium

if it isnt an element, then what is it? I know, it has no proton, but (hydrogen 1) has no neutrons. If you remove it from the pane because it doesnt exist, then I suggest removing Element UUE from the pane on UUO. Also, it is on some alternative tables. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ticklewickleukulele (talk • contribs) 03:34, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Neutronium is not considered as element by the corresponding wikipedia project WP:ELEM. You can try to convince the project otherwise (at WT:ELEM). Note the difference between n and elements like UUE: neutronium is particular, but heavy elements follow the periodic trends; some of them are not yet accepted as elements by the IUPAC, but there is little doubt they exist (e.g. elements 113, 115) - their characteristics are just not certain yet. Materialscientist (talk) 03:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) One thing to consider is that there's no non-nuclear chemistry associated with free neutrons; a free neutron can't be an atom either.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I forgot about it - a proton can bind an electron to form an atom (and then further with another proton to form a molecule), whereas neutronium is more like a plasma state - a highly unstable state. Thus if we accept neutronium as element, we should go on with lighter particles like muon, electron, etc. (they can be confined as aggregates in a plasma), which doesn't seem reasonable. Materialscientist (talk) 04:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Harsh

Is blocking new editors who remove tags not a bit harsh? I've been there before where I've put a CSD tag on and it keeps getting removed by a new editor, it's annoying but a 31 hour block is pretty harsh. Judging from the comments by the new editor he doesn't really get why things were so harsh: User_talk:Tracyhinds30. IRWolfie- (talk) 14:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Mail call

Hello, Materialscientist. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

• I provided further clarification. Please see my reply.

Unable to determine reason for block

Hi Materialscientist, Wikipedia has informed me that you've blocked my IP address, as part of a block on an entire range [204.11.32.0/22] for the reason, "it is believed to be an open proxy." I assume that this means a web proxy, which I'm fairly certain my machine isn't [after seeing this message, I even did a few packet traces to try to reassure myself that it hadn't been misconfigured or compromised], and if it is then I'd very much like to know so that I can rectify, but even after searching and reading the wikipedia pages on blocks, I seem unable to find an explanation of why the block was placed, nor can I find it in the "WikiProject on open proxies." Is there no publicly-accessible list of currently active blocks together with e.g. when placed, reason for placing (more detailed than just "believed open proxy"), who placed, etc.?

In lieu of my finding such information via a page, I wonder if you could just tell me why you blocked this range (which is in a facility in which the owner of one IP address likely has no relationship with another), which address(es) specifically are suspected of being open proxies, how that was determined, why an entire range was blocked, and how the range was chosen?

As it stands, it's more than a little frustrating -- not least of which since I can't even leave this message from my normal machine since the address is blocked -- and I can't submit an unblock request until I can determine why I was blocked to begin with (and repair if necessary).

And of course, most of all, if this information is already available from the front-end, could you point me to it and accept my apologies for lowering the SNR on your talk page [I did spend some time searching and reading the pages on blocks] -- at this point, if you can't tell me, there's not much else I can do short of placing an unblock request with no real reason given. Thank you very much. Deptrai (talk) 16:34, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The range was blocked per WP:Open proxy policy because IP 204.11.33.145 was used by the proxy newipnow.com. There are also web hosting servers within the range (which can and often do host open or semiopen proxies). Please follow the unblock instructions that you see when trying to edit from that particular IP. Alternatively you can post a request to examine your IP at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Requests‎. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 22:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: User:FG1010

If he makes one disruptive edit, you are free to indef block him while locking his talk page for abuse of the unblock template. --w^{L<speak·check>} 11:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for cleanup

I missed that image info in Damascus steel. There are so many random changes to info (without edit summaries) from IP users - this just looked like another one. Thanks for cleaning it up. - Special-T (talk) 16:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate you altering the article of A.D.Amalean, because multiple users have been adding inappropriate text, such as adding teachers names. Thanks for deleting this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.250.233.200 (talk) 21:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC) 

ps- I notice you are Anon from QE Boys, by your IP address. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.250.233.200 (talk) 21:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

RE: EMERALDS

Hello, you just deleted my edit to the emerald page because I did not included a citation. I though I had included one, but something must have happened and the citation was not added. Anyways, I have now re-added my edit, this time with the actual reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaciViviMori (talk • contribs) 01:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for blocking all of the spambots that I have reported tonight! Electric Catfish 00:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Blocking a vandal

Thanks for a prompt block of this incarnation of that vandal. The administration should react to such events like you do, not like an average sysop does. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

drill bit-viking

I came across this by chance while reading an Archaeological booklet(named as source).I thought the article needed an historical perspective to balance the mainly techno jargon. No date was on the booklet but it is obviously recent.I got it new in 2006 when visiting Jorvik.Pretty amazing to think the Vikings could make such a complex tool.1% — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.153.154.113 (talk) 10:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

New low-density record

You might find [6], which comments on doi:10.1002/adma.201290158, interesting :-) LeadSongDog come howl! 19:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. What should we add to aerographite? Materialscientist (talk) 23:06, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Argh! Seems I didn't notice the date on the story. Looks like the article's already off to a fine start. Sorry for the distraction. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program of editing. LeadSongDog come howl! 04:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I've learned about this material by an on-wiki note like yours, so thanks anyway. Materialscientist (talk) 04:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Materialscientist. You have new messages at HelloAnnyong's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 23:58, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Klitschko

For Vitali Klitschko..the knockout ratio is done from fights won by KO and wins only. Losses aren't factored in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.61.217.35 (talk) 00:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You're comparing apples to oranges. Who is the actual boxing reporter here? You or me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.61.217.35 (talk) 01:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

block lag?

I see that you applied a IP block here, but the editor got through 7 minutes later on apparently the same IP address here. Is that lag usual? --Lexein (talk) 00:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

This is not a lag - we normally allow blocked IPs/users to edit their talk pages even when blocked, so that they could appeal a mistaken block. We can revoke talk page access in case of abuse. Materialscientist (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Doh. Sorry, I knew that. Just not today. --Lexein (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion on Haumoana (Surfer/Musician)

You put a proposed deletion on Haumoana (Surfer/Musician). I inadvertently restored it warning the user for removing a speedy deletion template twice. I undid my last edit and apologized to the user. Did you mean to use a proposed deletion? I'm not touching that page for awhile. No need to reply. Thanks again for all your hard work. Jim1138 (talk) 01:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did mean it. This might be a speedy for lacking notability, but I am not sure about it - the topic is hard to Google it (too much interference for Haumoana, no time to research). Unreferenced BLP, with cited "references" being unrelated to the person. Also, the creator and their IP are obviously promoting the person across wiki (though this again hinges on the notability). Materialscientist (talk) 01:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Proposed deletion "If anybody objects to the deletion (usually by removing the {{proposed deletion}} tag - see full instructions below), the proposal is aborted and may not be re-proposed." Am I just confused? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 01:45, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I know, but this falls under WP:BLPPROD. I might have used a wrong prod template (never remember it, just figure out by typing ;-). Materialscientist (talk) 01:47, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

This article is also a recreation of a previous one deleted as copyvio of this. The current article looks like another copy, with a little wiki added (the prose is still identical for most of the article - duplication detector report: here). I have added a G12 tag in addition to the BLPPROD. --Tgeairn (talk) 17:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Neutral notice of an RfC

A Request for Comment has been posted for an article on which you have been an editor. If you wish to comment, go to Talk:List of African-American firsts# Request for Comment: Pro wrestling. --Tenebrae (talk) 11:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

U2

Ty drugoĭ glupyĭ vlagalishche. 184.170.129.148 (talk) 04:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

How about learning some grammar first :-). Materialscientist (talk) 04:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Gangnam Style

I saw you protected PSY article, can you please protect Gangnam Style too? There's the same mess. StasMalyga (talk) 14:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

No idea how to send you an email.

Have you met Alex Daily? I have. Have you seen any of his tattoos? I have. Has he ever spent the night at your house? He has at mine. If you think you know him better than me, prove it. Also, nobody ever said he's still alive. Check your facts (if you know how to do that outside of Wikipedia, genius).

RE: More Footnotes

"Thanks for pointing that iron needs more references, but so do nearly all wikipedia articles, and the situation with iron is relatively good. Thus your tagging did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Helping with adding sources would be more appreciated. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 00:13, 11 August 2012 (UTC)"

Dear Materialscientist,

You're welcome and many thanks to both you and all the people who contributed to this detailed article: it is much appreciated.

I must say, I disagree though: my tagging was constructive. To not cite a source is either lazy, or ignorant, or biased, or the choice of someone who is merely lacking the knowledge on how to do such a thing. Also, to use the excuse that nearly all Wikipedia articles need more references, and therefore the quality of this article should not be improved, is equatable to saying that most of the world doesn't know any better so therefore we should not set a precedent for quality research and reporting but instead, be just as lazy, or ignorant, or biased, or as unknowledgeable as those who choose not to cite their claims.

If you or the authors have the knowledge to cite, then set an example for the sake of posterity and for a generation of internet children whom these days rarely know the difference between truth or fiction because, without citations, this kind of writing becomes mostly-biased conjecture without supported claims.

Instead of exhibiting a controlling nature, I would suggest keeping the tags and accepting the fact that this article, like countless others, is poorly cited and that the writers should spend some time citing every sentence and claim (as it's not that difficult). And if you think the "situation with iron is relatively good" then, please; support your claim with citations because I can see many dimensions of this page that have yet to be written about or discovered (in due time, of course).

All the best,

50.132.66.138 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.132.66.138 (talk) 01:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Continued disruptive edits by IP user 24.42.66.103

24.42.66.103 continues to make disruptive edits and ignoring revert reasons posted to the user's talk page. The user has singled out players to which the user prefers to update, whilst creating issues with article credibility and verifiability. Within 3 days, here, here, and here. Zepppep (talk) 07:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I brought the user to your attention since you had blocked the user in the past. If you think I'm in the wrong, let me know. Otherwise I can raise the issue with a different editor. Thanks. Zepppep (talk) 04:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Nigel/Nijel Amos

I'm not sure whether it was correct to move this article. I know the IAAF spells his name with a "j", but the IAAF is prone for misspellings (see Odane/Odean Skeen, or Dmitry Kroyter/Kroytor). Most Botswana sources slightly favor spelling Amos' forename with a "g" (see [7] vs. [8]), and for now, so should we, I think. --bender235 (talk) 15:43, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Some kind of feedback would be appreciated. --bender235 (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm neutral. It is often hard to tell whether they are misspelled or intended. Sources are conflicting, and I would go by more reliable ones (IAAF is still better than news articles). If moot, then let it stay. Materialscientist (talk) 12:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Sislej Xhafa

Hi MaterialScentist. I notice that User: Evelkis got involved in a dispute continually over Sislej Xhafa, which is related to the issues. It is really unhelpful and counter-productive to get involved, continually whatever is to do with any Albanians. Do you think you could step in from the dispute for now. I don't know what is his User: Evelkis agenda? but it seems that whatever is any Albanian contributing for the sites that to deal with Albanians or any kind of modest contribution with the facts, he revert and his commodity and delete the important contribution. I don't understand why he do this? Why is abusing such precious Wikipedia the free encyclopedia, that is for sharing and learning. I will appreciate if you can step in. Thanks, I appreciate it. Estherboy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estherboy (talk • contribs) 14:49, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Just ignore him. It is another incarnation of this account you recently blocked, and a number of others. The signature is the "minor edit" summary, constant blanking of information without further explanation and moreover a single-issue venture which only wishes to disrupt Sislej Xhafa. If this is constructive, then I have seriously missed something. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

FYI, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dispute Resolution#blockage of new facts and information on the entry of Sislej Xhafa.

Also, there may be open proxy usage involved; see comments at User talk:ItsZippy#Sislej Xhafa and others...

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Polonium dioxide/GA1

It's been about 40 days since you posted to this review, and the article has not been changed as you requested. The nominator has been quite active on Wikipedia, but hasn't edited the article since June 26. If it has been abandoned, it's probably time to bring the review to an end. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Failed, thanks for reminding. It is a difficult topic for a GA (in terms of finding material to expand the article). Materialscientist (talk) 01:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. Sorry it didn't work out. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

LOL! It looks as though both of us completely forgot about it! I'll try to work on it again, but you are right. This is a difficult compound to write about! Double sharp (talk) 12:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for making my day! FWIW, this is exactly the kind of situation that has turned me off from editing Wikipedia. I realize my behavior could be better, but I'm tired of having editors that abuse their privileges, to make me justify edits like clarifying "it".

Please keep up the good work. 70.247.173.225 (talk) 03:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Infinitesimal calculus

Thanks for reverting me I have apologized to the IP for my errors in reverting him on his talk. I let Huggle get away from me and I made those errors I was planning to self revert but you beat me to it. Thanks I don't want to discourage a honest IP. TucsonDavidU.S.A. 03:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

You and 70.247.173.225 are doing good work. Mistakes do happen, and it is good that everyone understood what was going on. Materialscientist (talk) 03:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

en/commons issue

Hi - if you check out my recent deletion on Commons here and its "use" on en you may want to consider the uploader's account here. Looks like vandalism only one maybe. Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Agree and blocked here as well. Materialscientist (talk) 13:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

GWR Team

Guinness World Records Team, I believe. And I'm told the Chris Cross article is an autobiography. Dougweller (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Antiparallel

Hello. If you have time I am soliciting feedback. Pleae take a look at this and comment. You can copy edit if you like (since it is very short at this time). Also, I am sure you can understand its relevance to me. I want to flesh out the topic more, but so far I have only found such behavior related to magnetism (in books). Should I stick with (physics) or change it to (electromagnetism)? ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 18:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

OK. It appears that I have found a good book to help expand the topic here. If you get the chance please take a quick look at pages 10 and 12. You can use the "view all" link to see the pages indexed for quick access. There are other pages listed if you feel so inclined but I know you are busy. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 18:51, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Roger clemens protection request

I requested protection for Roger Clemens [here[9]] and even though he may be right and correct me if I'm wrong I think it was wrong for User:Callanecc to decline and close my request because he is not an admin and so he couldn't approve a request so shouldn't be declining them either. TucsonDavidU.S.A. 00:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Semiprotected for 2 weeks. It is a marginal case, and Callanecc had good reasons to suggest declining - low vandalism activity, on the other hand, little more than vandalism from IPs and new users recently. Materialscientist (talk) 00:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. TucsonDavidU.S.A. 01:00, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

46.7.228.74

Hi MS, I was rather surprised by your block of User:46.7.228.74. I know you used the rationale of edit-warring rather than vandalism, but you haven't blocked the other main party to the edit war, User:SummerPhD. In the interests of fairness, either bith parties should be blocked or neither. Would you mind either blocking ~SummerPhD or unblocking the IP? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

This was not a clear-cut case. However, the IP argued against more than one editor and, apart from this "historical" silliness, was removing some numbers (see their "-43" byte edits like [10]). On the one hand, nobody explained the IP that their PC (or likely some mobile device, or a crippled proxy server) was probably glitching with those removals. On the other hand, they might be experienced enough to figure that out. Materialscientist (talk) 05:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

The IP has a history of constructive edits, so the removal of the numbers doesn't appear malicious to me. To block only one party in an edit war is unfair, so you should, in my opinion, either unblock the IP or block his main opponent. Yes, another editor made a revert in the dispute, but that doesn't make SummerPhD's conduct any more or less acceptable than the IP's. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the IP was constructive in the past, but it would be unfair to block SummerPhD for reverting those removal of numbers. I have no hard feelings at all in this case - please feel free to unblock, but I won't do that myself unless I get into a direct communication with the IP. Materialscientist (talk) 06:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Help with an info box

I created Ronald Rodgers could you help out with a infobox I already up loaded a pic into commons. Thanks TucsonDavidU.S.A. 09:25, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

You can do it. Pick up the appropriate infobox (say, from an article on a similar person) and go through all the fields and change them (a common blunder is bits trailing from another person :-). If some fields are missing, go the template:xxx that you've chosen for the box. I can help if you get stuck. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 09:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Once upon a universe

dear material scientist,

since the website www.onceuponauniverse.com has not been updated in a year, I think you can clearly now understand it is not a blog, or a commercial enterprise in any respect (there is not a single advert on there, unlike most of the internet), but an educational resource set up to give a clear, scientific account of the story of the universe from the moment of the big bang up until the formation of our planet. It has been worked on by two astrophysicists currently working at two different scottish educational institutions. Would you please reconsider this site as an external link for those willing to expand their knowledge of the universe?

thankyou

Amphibio (talk) 12:24, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Suriname population

Creoles are 31% of Suriname's population and Maroons 10%. They are both descendants of black Africans which makes them 41%. The creoles in Suriname are not mulattoes but just black people with one or more white ancestors, just as African Americans. Friezer (talk) 14:15, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Look at my luck!!!

It's me, the person who started the small edit war on aerogel about 8 months ago (I was the first person on Wikipedia to mention metallic microlattice). And my name has a 2 on it now... I forgot my password, so I needed to get a new profile, but I have good news: I am starting an element collection, so I can help a few articles out!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scientific Alan 2 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Ron Rodgers

Ok so I got the info box set up. But I don't know how to fix the image which is kind messed up on Ronald Rodgers So if you or a page stalker can take a look that be awesome.TucsonDavidU.S.A. 01:26, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

How does one insert new or missing Copperfield TV show credits?

In reply to your Message: OK -- so one can't use WP links as references. How then does one add in new show credits for Mr. Copperfield? Are you saying it must have a printed source cited? The two shows both aired on national television, and the links we provided tied to the original show pages, with clips, etc. What more is needed before you feel it necessary to undo addition of these 2 credits? Your help would be appreciated -- as both are legitimate credits earned by Mr. Copperfield, that can be easily accessed for verification, but I'm puzzled as to how that could be, without WP links! -- What do you want, a footnote to a printed-media 'New York Times story, or some such, referring to the show??? That will surely discourage even conscientious users trying to update Wikipedia. Appreciate any consideration you could give to this somewhat helpless, I guess, but well-intentioned user -- me -- just attempting here to update Mr. Copperfield's bio. page in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.3.203 (talk) 10:24, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

We prefer that some reliable sources mentioned those biography facts (that you were adding), so that you could cite them. If those facts are only available from the video footage of the show, then you can use the footage as a source, marking minutes on the footage instead of pages in a printed source. The footage should be posted by some official account; for example, BBC on youtube - a video uploaded by an unofficial account won't do because it could have been edited. Materialscientist (talk) 10:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

So -- a BBC source is OK, but an A&E, or an OWN Network source is not? [What -- we're even outsourcing this kind of stuff abroad now?] I'm not up-loading video footage, in any event, just linking your readers to the Network WP's own footage in question. And -- I have no idea what the minute marks on their footage may be for the particular spot you are questioning -- but no one can or has edited the Network's WP footage of their own shows -- whereas your suggestion for You-Tube footage from BBC would seem to be much more susceptible to having been somehow edited or manipulated. If you would be so kind -- a little help here for a hapless user trying to correct omissions from your otherwise excellent and current Wikipedia page on Mr. Copperfield. . . . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.3.203 (talk) 10:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Let me clarify: we need to access a copy of the footage to verify the fact. It should be uploaded somewhere by the owner or a reliable account (I meant BBC as uploader, not necessarily the author of the video). Materialscientist (talk) 10:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

10-4 -- you can look at, verify, etc. the Oprah footage at: http://www.oprah.com/own-oprahs-next-chapter/Oprahs-Next-Chapter-David-Copperfield -- where it is posted by the owner, and is what I cited as a reference. That won't suffice? Remember, I'm not trying to upload it anywhere, merely cite it as a reference. Thks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.3.203 (talk) 11:30, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Such videos will do, but note that not everyone can access them (for example, I can't, from where I am right now). Materialscientist (talk) 11:40, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I really appreciate your assistance with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.3.203 (talk) 11:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

removal of detail

hi, this is the first time i used wikipedia so i am unaware of the eticate. Spiess is my step son and not all the details were 100% accurate, the name spiess was spelt wrong( Speiss ) and the dob was wrong nov 93 not feb 94 as should be,i corrected those issues. as far as citation goes well i was at the game when it was announced on the tannoy but not sure if there was written information. if the author cant get the name right or the DOB then one must question the authenticity of the authors sources. No body more than spiess himself has more correct information than me as i have been instumental in the boys football since a young age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flyndou (talk • contribs) 12:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks~

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For being a watchful eye against vandalism, large and small. Papacha (talk) 11:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

assist

hi sorry i also made another revision about him being watched by bigger clubs, if you google fabian spiess/ speiss (as nearly every one has a misspelling of the name)/ manchester united you will see many article / newspaper clips of this. i really dont understan how to do all this editing and revision and citation, the information i revised is correct would appreciate if you could keep the revisions i made or help me do it correctly, i am poor with computers but would like to see correct information about the boy, it is currently wrong data and incomplete he came on the pitch for the first team ( last 10 mins)against Nottingam forrest in a recent friendly and has had several appearances on the bench including last weeks capital one games vs Bradord city. your help appreciated to correct and update the profile thank you (Flyndou (talk) 11:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC))

Wikiproject Biography banner on talk page

FYI... On talk pages, the WikiProject Biography banner does not contain the "priority" parameter. Instead it is done by groups... sports-priority=, musician-priority=, a&e-priority=, filmbio-priority=, politician-priority=low, etc. Bgwhite (talk) 20:38, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, "auto=yes" is only added by bots, not humans... that is unless you a computer, Mr. Skynet sir. Bgwhite (talk) 20:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah thanks, I obviously just copied all those templates from another talk. Materialscientist (talk) 22:54, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

First time contributor

Hello Materialscientist-- I see that you have monitored revisions of the Chris Stokes (record producer) page. I'm a first time contributor and have added some material to that page. I left the "insufficient sources" admin comment at the top. I am still researching additional biographical material to add to the page. Just wanted to say hello and thanks for your huge contributions to my favorite reference site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lemurtron (talk • contribs) 23:44, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

errr only 24 hours?

The username (Victoriapolicemedia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) is a breach of the username policy and looking at the history of the page is likely a sock puppet of the now blocked editor Onlinecommsunit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) after using Digmediaunit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and it also seems using an IP to bypass the block 203.174.145.62 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Bidgee (talk) 23:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

This was just to send a message, and it takes one second to reblock indef if they resume. If they are indeed socks, we'll see another one shortly, and blocking won't stop it - then we'd better go for semiprotection. Materialscientist (talk) 23:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

ferret

I only put down what We do here in the country and the "reference" you seek would be me and the guys that go ferreting.

copyrighted material

I fully understand, I apologize for my error and will not let this happen again

Orphaned non-free media (File:BalikaVadhu.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:BalikaVadhu.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:18, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

South Korea

Please do not remove without any basis for no apparent reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous sensible (talk • contribs) 11:24, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice.

In Japan, the Korean people pretending to be Japanese, we have a variety of work activities. Wiki as well as English, German, French, etc. They are claimed to have fabricated the basis of their reckless say. The editors thought after more thorough investigation and it should be carried out based on the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous sensible (talk • contribs) 11:36, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Is not a self-published. Video following article is based on a public. --Anonymous sensible (talk) 12:47, 17 August 2012 (UTC)