User talk:Christian75/Archive 2013

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 2012 Archive 2013 Archive 2



The Signpost: 24 December 2012

The Signpost: 31 December 2012

The Signpost: 07 January 2013

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

The Signpost: 18 February 2013

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

The Signpost: 04 March 2013

The Signpost: 11 March 2013

Wishing to remove image I contributed.

Hello. I had formerly contributed to articles regarding The Beatles. After a series of editing disputes regarding the band's name, I quit contributing to Beatles articles. As such, I withdrew photos I contributed to Beatle articles which include this one [File:Bfs lp corr.JPG‎] which I removed licensing info to hasten the deletion of this image from Wikipedia. Steelbeard1 (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

But its not the right way to do it. A better way would be to remove it from the article, and then mark the file for deletion (which it will be, because its non-free) - But maybe someone will undo your edit at the article... (when you press the save button: "By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL." - the material you post isnt "yours" anymore... Good luck :-) Christian75 (talk) 22:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Only I have publicly declared that I quit editing all articles related to The Beatles so going back to make an edit does not look right. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

"Unexplained removal of content"

Why do you revert an edit based on "unexplained removal of content" when the edit summary includes an explanation? (talk) 21:00, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Undoing corrections


I do not plan to "contribute" with information about the band. I'm just correcting the misinformation on the article. Sincerely, I DO believe that you know nothing about Integ, so my "contribution" shouldn't appear "constructive" to you. Even band members do not wish their band's info to be published here.

Best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
WOW! You reverted that vandalism to my talkpage in the same minute it was entered! I suspect the work of Huggle... Kevin12xd (contribs) 23:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :-) I'm using Huggle... Christian75 (talk) 07:33, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

That 78.8 IP vandal

Hi Christian75, just for your info, this guy has been vandalising and causing disruption since this morning (UTC+8). Arctic Kangaroo 07:31, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for information. Christian75 (talk) 07:33, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
BTW, I have placed a sock notice on his page. You may want to see who the socks are, but I may not have the full list as I was offline for 4+ hours. Cheers! Arctic Kangaroo 07:46, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2013


Many thanks, Christian75, for keeping an eye out for vandalism on my personal pages. Regards, Pinethicket (talk) 11:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome :-) Christian75 (talk) 18:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)


Hi. When you reverted a vandal, you unfortunately didn't revert far enough. I suspect that the poster of the edit you reverted to and the IP are one and the same (or are best mates...), and I've reverted all of their stuff to a sound looking version. Peridon (talk) 17:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Ingrid Mattosn

Hi Christian75

could you please explain why you an other contributors are undoing my recent edit? I am new to wiki and this is my first time

In fact I didn't like the old version about Mattson, as it didn't represent her as an accomplished figure and do not shwo any of her articles and work. Could you please help me out in editing her page to make it more constrictive?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demakaz (talkcontribs) 18:03, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The revert was because of the change of her name (from Ingrid Mattoon to Ingrid Mattoon) (see), and your introduction to big text (see). A good place to test new things is your sandbox - you can find a link at the top of your screen - or here: {{user:Demakaz/sandbox}}. Christian75 (talk) 18:42, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips. Can you please in future edit the page instead of undoing my work. I really appreciate your help and cooperation.Demakaz (talk) 18:59, 25 March 2013 (UTC).

Malt entry in wiki

Hi Christian My edit was to improve the Malt section to make it more commercially relevant. I had approval from the UK malting industry to add the text. This was in response to international brewers who said the wiki entry on Malt was too biochemical and did not address the main attributes of malt and they would not point customers and users to the information as it was presented. Can I check please if you are working in the malting industry because if you are we should be working together to agree a better text. Thanks Nigel (talk) 10:01, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I reverted it primary because of your introduction of <big> and a you just wrote a lot of the top of the page. I have reverted my edit, because it was not an "edit test", but it looked like it. Sorry for that. But look at the article now (unless some have reverted my edit), it does not look lige a Wikipedia article anymore. The introduction should have more wikilinks to other articles (which you make with [[article name]]... Christian75 (talk) 11:46, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Christian - thanks for reverting the material. I agree it is not yet suitable and needs links adding. I am happy to do that via editing and agree it is not really in wiki format at the moment. Please bear with me and I will do that over the coming week. (talk) 16:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 March 2013

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

The Signpost: 08 April 2013


Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
thanks for a quick and simple answer! Now I understand how to correct my mistakes! Anna Karolina Heinrich (talk) 11:28, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Double standards

I have absolutely no doubt that if I were an Argentine posting such content, you would allow it to stay. There can be no other reason for your actions other than the intrinsic hatred for my country which exists on your continent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:32, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


Why did you move Dimethylglycine? It's incorrect, the hydrochloride is the one that is sold as a nutritional supplement. Ariel. (talk) 00:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Because the article is about dimethylglycine, and not the hydrochloride. All the references is about dimethylglycine. Glycine is sold as the hydrochloride too, but the article is named glycine. And by the way, hydrochloride is HCl not HCL. Christian75 (talk) 01:00, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
So, now you get to argue with User_talk:Plasmic_Physics#Dimethylglycine. You two have opposite opinions. Ariel. (talk) 03:57, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I think the discussion should be at the talk page of the article. I cant see that user Plasmic Physics disagree... Christian75 (talk) 08:20, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

Core/shell semiconductor nanocrystal

Christian, yes, the "one" exception (third on my google search) is in the most highly ranked journal in the world, Nature, published just eight months ago. There are others, not far down: Nanoscale, with not a bad IF of almost 6; published just two years ago, its article already has 70 citations. Then shortly after, the prestigious American Chemical Society's ACS Nano published an article using the dash. Elsevier's Ultrasonics Sonochemistry had the dash in a September 2012 article. I haven't looked further than the second google page.

Quite a few hyphens are in evidence in the google search, and in a few instances the items are just banged together with a space between them (an even bigger disservice to the reader); but en.WP's Manual of Style by significant consensus follows guidelines for the dash that forge a compromise of the rulings of the major authorities on both sides of the Atlantic. The dash is normally used to join two parallel items, especially in the sense of bridging them; that is surely the case here and explains why major journals and publishers use the dash. The slash, on the other hand, is not widely approved except where alternation is at issue (a toggle-switch situation, as it were). It's not all that pretty, either. en.WP's MOS doesn't recommend its wide use.

Will you reconsider? Tony (talk) 12:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I have no special feelings about the name. Just saw you moved a few articles from names with - to –, and this article. After inspecting ref, I moved it, with lower cases too. So feel free to moved it :-) I will not act on it. Christian75 (talk) 20:33, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Christian. I've asked User:Dicklyon, a US scientist and engineer, for an opinion. Tony (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

This Month in GLAM: April 2013

This month in GLAM logo.png

Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 21:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

Kannst du dich in der deutscher wikipedia einschreiben?Wäre cool.Gruß aus Berlin.--J.Dygas (talk) 05:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

TemplateData is here

Hey Christian75

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:04, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mannich reaction may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • of [[formaldehyde]]. Tertiary amines lack an N–H proton to form the intermediate [[enamine]]]]. α-CH-acidic compounds ([[nucleophile]]s) include [[carbonyl]] compounds, [[nitrile]]s, [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:58, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

The Signpost: 10 July 2013

re Deletion of Dronabinol

I'm no longer an admin, suggest you ask another admin, or at WP:AN if you wish, — Cirt (talk) 03:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2013

July 2013

Hi I deleted the content from Jenny Wilson (cricketer) as I do not wish that information to be avaiable on wikipedia. I do not know how to delete the page completely, can you help?

Hwfirstxi (talk) 10:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)jenny

There is a guide, Wikipedia:Guide to deletion Christian75 (talk) 11:07, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 July 2013

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

Re:Proposed deletion of Biokovo (disambiguation)

I agree with the deletion. Best regards! --Ivan T. (talk) 08:05, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

List of professional wrestling promotions in Australia

Read here. This was stated five years ago and was never challenged. That is the consensus at present. So it's up to you to prove that wrong, and until then the redirect stays as the present consensus. (talk) 23:59, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Five years ago! Its not consensus - its written at some random talk page, as you say, five years ago. I have reverted your edit - and take it to WP:AFD. Instead of have an edit war with a few editors... Christian75 (talk) 00:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Where was the objection? Nowhere. So it's consensus. The redirect stays, and redirects do NOT go to AfD by the way. Prove notability on the linked talk page and argue it there to gain a different consensus. (talk) 00:10, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Christian, I have to inform you that several Australian promotion articles have been deleted via AfD over the years, such as PCW and AWF. It was on this basis that the comment linked was made it would appear. The IP is right in general although a few more links would have helped (I dont have them handy myself). If you think consensus is wrong, I recommend that you go to the talk page as suggested and state your case against the present redirect and support the list as it was. I would also point out that lists that contain non notable promotions are likely to be deleted anyway. You should be grateful for the redirect. BerleT (talk) 00:40, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I have no speciel interest in the subject. I just saw that the article has been reverted "a lot" of times lately. Three other users has reverted the redirect lately too. Christian75 (talk) 00:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Well doesn't that say to you that there may be some strength in the redirect edit then? It certainly does to me. That in fact is a consensus in itself in a way. BerleT (talk) 00:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Because its the same IP-user which make it a redirect, and at least three different users which revert it (four with me). BTW are you the same user as the IP? Christian75 (talk) 00:51, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
No I'm not I just came on and saw this in the recent changes and had a look. I can tell you that the IP restoring the list is the one user with a wavering IP. I checked the whois and it's the same provider with a reputation for it (ISPhone). The IP restoring the list has a habit also of trying to prod redirects instead of taking them to RFD as required. At least that's what I saw at a glance. Too much of a coincidence. At least the IP restoring the redirect prior to the one you're arguing with isn't changing. BerleT (talk) 00:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Oh wait I see what you mean. I was too busy looking at the busy IP that made several edits. But I did go to their talk pages because the first reverting IP did tell them that the list wasn't notable as well, and there's been no reaction by them as there has been by you. And by your own admission, this isn't a special interest of yours. I have an interest, and I can tell you with the AfD's I mentioned as evidence that the notability issue is valid and the redirect certainly appears to be the right result. So honestly I think it should be left alone. If there are interested parties looking to change the consensus, let them do so. I may even encourage them right now. BerleT (talk) 01:05, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

STiki emergency

Tech News: 2013-34;

19:50, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • year=2006|publisher=Museum of Modern Art|location=New York|isbn=9780870704468|page=19|url=*[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 September 2013

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited World landscape, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orpheus and Euridice (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 September 2013


Hi, I have reverted your merge, because it is incorrect. Scopus used to be part of SciVerse, not the othe way around, and currently Elsevier seems to have retired SciVerse: the Scopus information page does not even mention SciVerse anymore, nor does ScienceDirect. The SciVerse page redirects now to Scirus. In addition, SciVerse is/was just an online platform and all sources are primary and not-independent either. The existing situation (not in the Scopus article, redirecting to Elsevier) seems to be the best solution. --Randykitty (talk) 03:53, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

  • If you have reason to disagree with me, then you should start a discussion on the articles' talk pages (preferably) or here and react to the arguments that I gave above. Starting an edit war is not productive. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 13:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Randykitty, I hoped the edit summary explained it, but it didnt – sorry... The content of SciVerse ( has been merged into Scopus - and can not be deleted because its part of the articles history. SciVerse should have the template {{Redirect from merge}} because this redirect may not be deleted unless the article Scopus is deleted too (another method is to merge the history, and then delete SciVerse). See Wikipedia:Merging#How_to_merge for a guide to merging. The content of Wikipedia isnt public domain, and therefore copy/paste is not allowed (but happend a lot of time anyway). The tag {{merged from}}: "this template identifies that another page was previously merged into the current article." Which it was. Christian75 (talk) 14:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
      • I see, the edit summary was a bit unclear to me, my bad. I have restored the tag. --Randykitty (talk) 14:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
        • Fine. I am not touching the article - I have no feelings about SciVerse anyway :-) Christian75 (talk) 14:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2013

2nd Canadian Infantry Division vs. 2nd Canadian Division

Hi Christian, I've started a discussion here and would be interested in your take on it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


Dear Christian75 I'm surprised to hear that the article about one of the best tools of quantum chemistry has a low value. P99am (talk) 12:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

First the rating is my subjective opinion. But it does not mean it has low value, it means it has low importance in the WikiProject chemistry (which has no practical importance :-) It is based on my feeling about how many people chemist/"normal" people know the subject and/or wants to learn about the subject. I'm sure that if there was a wikiproject quantum chemistry the importance would be high, and if somebody adds wikiproject science to the talk page; the importance would be bottom. If you insist to change the importance to mid, I will not start an edit warChristian75 (talk) 12:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I changed to mid. Firefly is not the most quoted program, but is a well known. And this is the fastest program, at least among free.

Tech News: 2013-40

19:55, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 October 2013

The Signpost: 09 October 2013

Odd Nerdrum

I see you've listed the odd Nerdrum article as C .... In addition to a ref clean up and I'd add more on kitsch what do you see the article needs to improve. Thanks for your insights.(olive (talk) 14:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC))

I really dont know the subject very well. After a second look it looks close to a B, if not. Maybe it misses some references in some of the unosurced subsections. :-) Christian75 (talk) 13:07, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I plan to add content and I 'll also make sure present content is sourced.(olive (talk) 15:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC))


Greetings -

Thank you for your update regarding - Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joe Ellis White - .

The team working on Dr. Joe White's Wikipedia page is located in Los Angeles, CA. The Joe E. White Library located in Oklahoma is retrieving the newspaper consent/copyright approval regarding the articles verifying Dr. White's background. We will scan the approvals as a single document into Wikipedia yet not post to Dr. White's Wiki page. Please let me know of any concerns? vwhite90057

Vwhite90057 (talk) 21:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 October 2013

Diphosphorus is important?

Curious about what about P2 you find even slightly important? --Smokefoot (talk) 22:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

First I dont care about the importance= in the wikiprojects, just the class. And one of my "projects" is to rate all chemistry articles. If you just had changed importance I wouldt have reacted... Second, I think all allotropes of the elements are important, and in inorganic chemistry I remember I had to learn the cycle of P. But feel free to change the importance, I will not revert you... :-) Christian75 (talk) 22:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I reserve the right to be slightly dopey, hence my mess. --Smokefoot (talk) 23:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-42

09:10, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2013

Tech News: 2013-43

09:40, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Control/Status Register, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Storage devices (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 October 2013

Tech News: 2013-44

10:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Ionic bonding

Hi Christian75,

In keeping with the comments of Vsmith I moved the page and and gave it a pretty thorough rewrite. I also removed the disputed tag. Jcwf (talk) 01:16, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 November 2013

Tech News: 2013-45

13:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Huggle 3

Hey Christian75! I am Petrb, one of core developers of Huggle, the antivandalism tool, which you are beta testing (according to I am happy to announce that Huggle 3 is ready for some testing. You can read more about it at WP:Huggle/Huggle3_Beta. Please keep in mind that this is a development version and it is not ready for regular use. That means you must:

  • Watch your contribs - when anything happens you didn't want, fix it and report a bug
  • Frequently checkout source code and build latest version, we change it a lot

If you find any problem with a feature that is supposed to work perfectly, please let us know. Some features are not ready yet, it is listed in known problems on Huggle3 beta page, you don't need to report these - we know it! So, that's it. Have fun testing and please let us know about any problems, either using bugzilla @ or #huggle connect. Please respond to my talk page, I am not going to watch your talk page. Thank you Petrb (talk) 10:58, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Flow Newsletter - November 14

Hi. This is a brief note to let you know about an update to the Main FAQ (the addition of a large table of Components of the discussion system), and also to specifically request your feedback on two items: our sandbox release plan, and a draft of the new contributors survey. We look forward to reading your input on these or other topics - Flow can only get better with your ideas! –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

Tech News: 2013-47

06:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Huggle 3 beta is out - and we need more feedback!

Hey Christian75, how are you? I am Petrb, one of huggle developers, and you are currently subscribed as a beta tester of huggle on meta (meta:Huggle/Members. You may not have noticed, but this week I released first beta precompiled installers for ubuntu and microsoft windows! Wikipedia:Huggle/Huggle3_Beta has all the links you need. So if you can, please download it, test it and report all bugs that is really what we need now. Don't forgot that as it's just a beta it's unstable and there are some known issues. Be carefull! Thank you for helping us with huggle Petrb (talk) 16:28, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

  • Featured content: F*&!

Tech News: 2013-49

08:38, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

Tech News: 2013-50

08:24, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

Tech News: 2013-51

08:22, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 December 2013