User talk:Footlessmouse

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Hi I’ve just reviewed A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity. Thanks for creating such a good article. Let me know on my talk page if you ever need any help with anything. Happy editing! Mccapra (talk) 08:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Can I second this? Great work on Analytical Dynamics of Particles and Rigid Bodies. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 23:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity

The article A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Forbes72 -- Forbes72 (talk) 03:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For improving Next.js in order to cement a "keep" consensus at AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks for helping get "Levels (Avicii song)" to GA status. Lazman321 (talk) 22:04, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Carbonaceous sulfur hydride

On 2 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carbonaceous sulfur hydride, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the synthetic compound carbonaceous sulfur hydride is the world's first room-temperature superconductor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carbonaceous sulfur hydride. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Carbonaceous sulfur hydride), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence

I wanted to leave this message here to say that the work that I have seen of yours including the most recent DYK on solid state physics, shows consistent very high quality work! Thanks for all that you do! Cheers and Good luck! PS: Regarding the interaction with the other user above, I would not index high on that one, and would go as far as to let you know that it should not impact your mind space. I want to specify one interaction where you yourself identified DOIs and links that were not resolving from one publisher during our DYK review, while I had earlier said that I was AGF on all offline citations. Ktin (talk) 02:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

DYK for A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity

On 14 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that as part of a famous priority dispute, E. T. Whittaker's 1953 book claimed that Henri Poincaré and Hendrik Lorentz developed the theory of special relativity before Albert Einstein? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

October 2020 GAN Backlog drive

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Thank you for conducting 6 reviews in the October 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 48%. Regards, Eddie891 Talk Work 14:11, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

AfD notice

Hi. Please see this AfD following on from the RfC you commented on. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

• @Lugnuts: Wow! I thought about leaving a !vote a couple of times, but it was just so contentious with so many responses. It is crazy to me how many people argued on there for keep after there was clear consensus on the page itself to send it to AfD. It seems we will need to open yet another RfC to rehash out the split propositions in light of the deletion request failing. Something will have to change on there, the page is over 500kb now and will likely double in the next couple of months, so not doing anything isn't a very good option. (I did notice one keep !vote that argued the page shouldn't be split and they said the list wasn't that long - I strongly disagree) Footlessmouse (talk) 02:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Quite a few of the keep comments are "it's useful", but I doubt any admin would favour deletion. Once the AfD is done, I plan to start the ball rolling with an idea on how to split the article. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:54, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#RfC on AMS fellowship selectiveness

Hello, Footlessmouse,

I was looking over this RfC and your comments on David Eppstein's talk page and I think you might be taking normal disagreement over policy and editing on Wikipedia too personally. Disputes happen every day here and some folks argue forcefully against each other about some policy guideline one day and a week later collaborate on writing an article. It's not about you, as a person, but about the argument you are putting forward and people can take issue in your policy interpretation without it meaning that they are attacking you. And you don't need to withdraw from participating when there are disagreements or apologize for taking a stand opposed to someone else's point of view. I went through a grueling Request for adminship when I became an administrator and I still go for help to people who voted against me becoming an admin! And they often went into detail about why I wasn't qualified. But you move on and you don't hold grudges. There are occasionally personal attacks that do happen on Wikipedia but in that RfC I just saw normal debate occurring. When there is harassment, that is punished by an editing block.

Conflict and disagreement is a part of the messy process of collaborative editing and I hope you will shrug this off and tomorrow continue with the editing work that interests you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:00, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Liz: Thank you. I have a lot going on right now and maybe its not the best time for me to be starting potentially controversial conversations. You are probably right, but I felt attacked because I kept trying to emphasize the singular nature of the question, I even struck out the comment mentioning the article and they just kept berating me over it. Then I wrote the comments on their wall after I said I wanted out and their response was to imply my RfC is invalid because I was acting in bad faith by opening the RfC after the whole template incident on that page, which I was also wrong for (or at least that's how I read it). I really did just want to have on record whether or not they counted, for future reference for much more than that page. I was under the impression it would be helpful either way, as then we would all be sure that fellow of the AMS and APS are notable and to avoid voting for their deletion. I don't hold grudges for any length of time, but I unfollow pages if I become overwhelmed. Some I may add back to my watchlist sometime in the future. I'm honestly at a cross roads on Wiki, I think it is best if I take some time off and re-evaluate what I'm doing here, we'll see how that goes... Footlessmouse (talk) 04:46, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Precious

complex books

Thank you for quality articles about books such as A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity, Introduction to Solid State Physics and The Color of Law, for substantial article reviewing, for "it will be a project requiring a whole lot of reading", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2484 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:51, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Wow, I appreciate that more than you know. Given all my recent trip-ups, I do not feel as though I deserve it, I was honestly preparing to exit the Wiki platform for good. I am honored to be considered for such an award, though, thank you so much!

@Footlessmouse:, I also wanted to take a moment to step in and echo Gerda Arendt's views. As I have mentioned earlier, I really think quite highly of your work here. If you want to take some time to recharge yourself offline (perhaps over the Thanksgiving break, if you are in this geography) that is definitely good. But, please know that your good work is definitely appreciated. Please prioritize your well being and do not let anything that happens here affect your personal well being. Good luck with everything. Ktin (talk) 23:33, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

@Ktin: Thank you! That sounds like a good plan: I'll spend a week or so catching up on Netflix and Hulu and re-evaluate then. I'm sure I'll be back—I'm honestly addicted to the platform—I just need to force myself to keep a little distance and not get too wrapped up in everything. Footlessmouse (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Nice to wake up to this ;) - Footlessmouse, I normally wait until the first DYK but was a bit afraid you might not read it then. This is from the cabal of the outcast, - I hope you don't mind. See rather on top of my talk that my first wish is for editors to return. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you again. This immediately brightened my day and I am very grateful for it. I will continue editing, I just need a few self-imposed rules on how I interact in discussions here. In hindsight, I feel foolish for not taking Liz's advice more seriously and just giving the whole thing more time. Here is to learning to shrug it off and move along! Thank you all for your kindness and sound advice. Footlessmouse (talk) 20:14, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Viscosities.gif

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Viscosities.gif, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust The Homunculus 07:14, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Footlessmouse

Thank you for creating The Meaning of Relativity.

User:Gazal world, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice Work!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Gazal world}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Gazal world (talk) 21:48, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Meaning of Relativity

Hello! Your submission of The Meaning of Relativity at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! David Eppstein (talk) 07:01, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Introduction to Solid State Physics

On 30 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Introduction to Solid State Physics, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that, by choosing the content included in his classic 1953 introductory textbook on the subject, Charles Kittel helped define the field of solid-state physics? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Introduction to Solid State Physics. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Introduction to Solid State Physics), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Nice job!

		The Science Barnstar
		I find articles about books particularly heartwarming — it's much the same kind of joy as prowling the aisles of a nicely esoteric bookstore — so I appreciate your contributions quite a lot. I actually started the page on Jackson back in 2017, and I'm pleased to see it expanded! XOR'easter (talk) 18:12, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

@XOR'easter: Thank you! I have grown fond of working on articles about books as well. I think WP is the best possible place to summarize their reviews and impact. Many of these books, especially ones like Jackson, are extremely important, given their influence on physics. Also, writing book articles is relatively simple for WP, as all of the literature is self-contained in the reviews. I'm probably going to keep at it until I am satisfied that all the standard physics textbooks have an article here. Footlessmouse (talk) 19:27, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

The surprising thing was that Classical Electrodynamics was listed as an example on the WikiProject Physics importance scale, but it didn't exist yet! XOR'easter (talk) 22:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

@XOR'easter: That's really funny! I'm glad I went and looked at that: "High impact physics journals. Books famous enough to be known by their author only to most of the physics community. Famous popular science publications" are all mid importance, I can use that, as I've created at least four books that I believe qualify: Purcell and Morin, Born and Wolf, Ashcroft and Mermin, and Kittel. You could make an argument that the CM books aren't broad enough, but Principles of Optics and Electricity and Magnetism undeniably qualify. Also, all three of Whittaker's History and his Analytical Dynamics would both have qualified if WP was started a few decades earlier, but time has worn down his name recognition. Footlessmouse (talk) 07:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

One we still seem to be missing is Sakurai [1][2][3], or as of 2010 Sakurai and Napolitano. It's often mentioned alongside Shankar, which we do have an entry for, and it's a point of comparison for aspiring QM textbooks. I've had a bit of trouble finding reviews of the more recent edition, though. XOR'easter (talk) 20:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@XOR'easter: Funny enough, I have Sakurai on my to do list, which was my primary book when learning the subject, there are references for it there. I have also seen a lot about Shankar but can only find two non-trivial reviews: 12. According to WP:NBOOK, though, the books are notable if they are the subject of at least two non-trivial reviews or "The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools". I don't think its an exaggeration to say that every book we would consider writing a page for qualifies under these guidelines. This review calls it one of the "classic introductory texts" for QM. Would you like to work on one while I work on the other? If so, which one would you like to work on? Footlessmouse (talk) 21:13, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@XOR'easter: I apologize, I misread your comment. Yes, unfortunately I cannot find any reviews of the second or third editions of Sakurai which was coauthored with Napolitano, but there are three or four reviews of earlier editions and lots of recommendations. I have some references on my to do list if you are wanting to work on it, otherwise I can throw a page together in a bit. Thanks! Footlessmouse (talk) 22:15, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I have created the page for Modern Quantum Mechanics, it is just a stub for now but we can work on it over time. I apologize again for misreading your comment earlier. Footlessmouse (talk) 08:07, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

No worries! By the time I'd gotten myself sufficiently organized to reply (i.e., just now), you'd already created the page. And it looks like it's off to a good start! Thanks again for all the work you've put into this area. XOR'easter (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Subtle is the Lord

On 7 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Subtle is the Lord, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Abraham Pais's 1982 biography of Albert Einstein was the first to focus on Einstein's scientific contributions as opposed to his life as a popular figure? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Subtle is the Lord. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Subtle is the Lord), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your many advice! It really helps. SilverMatsu (talk) 10:47, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: Thank you! I'm glad I have been able to help. Thank you for all your hard work! Footlessmouse (talk) 11:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK for The Color of Law

On 13 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Color of Law, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Color of Law by Richard Rothstein exposes policies of racial segregation in nearly all United States presidential administrations dating back to the late 1800s? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Color of Law. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Color of Law), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:01, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK for The Meaning of Relativity

On 19 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Meaning of Relativity, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1921 book The Meaning of Relativity represents Albert Einstein's only attempt to provide an overview of general relativity that was both comprehensive and accessible to non-specialists? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Meaning of Relativity. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Meaning of Relativity), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought

On 21 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in his book Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein, Gerald Holton argues that philosophy from Either/Or influenced Niels Bohr's concept of complementarity? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought), and if they received a combined total of 416.7 or more views per hour (ie, 5,000-plus views in 12 hours or 10,000-plus in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The End of the Certain World

Hello! Your submission of The End of the Certain World at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 18:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2021 WikiCup!

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Nancy Thorndike Greenspan

Hello & Happy New Year! You wrote (I believe) an article on a book by Nancy Thorndike Greenspan called 'The End of the Certain World: The Life and Science of Max Born' which is excellent. I an trying to create a page for the author, Nancy Thorndike Greenspan. However I am getting pushback and a bit confused as to why she is not deemed notable enough when I see other authors with less citations approved. I am rather new but read the documentation on notability and it seems very arbitrary and subjective. Can you assist or provide some advice? Thank you! Fergyman (talk) 13:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Fergyman: Thanks for taking initiative! I am under the impression the draft should not have been rejected for notability purposes and I stated such in a help ticket I opened here. Footlessmouse (talk) 19:03, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you and I must admit your draft was better than mine! Would you mind if I lifted some info from your draft for snippets?Fergyman (talk) 19:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Fergyman: It is all yours. I don't know if all the sources are the best (one of the reasons I gave up on making the article), but you should be able to sort it out with the editors at AfC. Footlessmouse (talk) 19:08, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Greenspan's article was approved. I can not thank you enough for your help. What a great learning process watching how you fought for the page and not backing down. Outstanding. Now if I could only get a photo of her uploaded around commons compyrights! Thanks again Footlessmouse! Fergyman (talk) 15:27, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

@Fergyman: Congradulations! It is highly unlikely you will get a pic while she is still living, though you can try. She is involved with several organizations.

• APS Gala - "APS encourages the redistribution of the materials included in this newspaper provided that attribution to the source is noted and the materials are not truncated or changed." - You can write them an email asking for official permission to use one of their photographs of her. See WP:Requesting copyright permission The official picture we see everywhere is under copyright (Gary Grieg) and is highly unlikely to be released for a hundred years or so. Footlessmouse (talk) 20:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

DYK for The End of the Certain World

On 5 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The End of the Certain World, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to a 2005 biography, Max Born (pictured), the author of the classic textbook Principles of Optics, felt dejected when he did not share in the 1932 Nobel Prize that was given to his assistant Werner Heisenberg? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The End of the Certain World. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The End of the Certain World), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Principles of Optics

On 5 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Principles of Optics, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to a 2005 biography, Max Born (pictured), the author of the classic textbook Principles of Optics, felt dejected when he did not share in the 1932 Nobel Prize that was given to his assistant Werner Heisenberg? You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Principles of Optics), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Subtle is the Lord

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Subtle is the Lord you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:41, 9 January 2021 (UTC)