This user is an American.
This user has autopatrolled rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has autoconfirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user uses HotCat to work with categories.
This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.
This user uses STiki to fight vandalism.
This user uses Twinkle to fight vandalism.
This user has a Global Account.
This user is a "Master Editor" on Wikipedia.

User talk:Drbogdan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome To Dr. Dennis Bogdan's ("Master Editor") Talk Page


Hello, Drbogdan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!   Will Beback  talk  03:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

The Signpost[edit]

The Signpost
6 September 2016

Happy New Year![edit]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message
@BatteryIncluded: Thank You *very much* for the Greeting - it's *greatly* appreciated - Happy New Year to you as well - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 03:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Good Article nominations[edit]

Drbogdan, I noticed that you attempted to add Good Article nominations for two articles to the WP:GAN page. Unfortunately, this is a page generated by a bot, so both of your additions were overwritten because they weren't properly submitted.

Before I even get to the mechanics of submitting an article, I'd like to urge you to read the Good Article criteria, which explains what an article is judged on. You might also want to look at other Good Articles on films, to see what sorts of information are typically included. "Making North America (film)" is a very short article, and doesn't have some usual sections for films, such as Production information; these will be needed if the article is to be reviewed successfully. Any information in the article's lead section is expected to also be in the body of the article (see WP:LEAD, one of the GA criteria, for further details), and the section on reviews needs to be more in your own words rather than almost entirely quotes from reviewers (and preferably more than two to get a broader range of opinion).

The instructions for submitting nominations are at WP:GANI, along with some excellent information about the entire process. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: Thank you *very much* for your comments - and suggestions - first time I've considered nominating an article for WP:GA - may have to study the process a bit more - Thanks again for your comments - they're *greatly* appreciated - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:58, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Genetic engineering[edit]

I did research. It is not gmo. "YouTube video" (11:25) [unsigned by: Kowwe (talk) 21:00, 1 February 2016 (UTC)]

@Kowwe: Thank you for your comments - please discuss your edits on the "talk page" of the "Genetic engineering" article - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:19, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Abiogenesis and methanol[edit]

Interesting hypothesis:[1] Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 14:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for sharing the ref link[1] - yes - agreed - interesting hypothesis - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:58, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
More on abiogenesis:[2] I have not read it yet. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 07:36, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for the latest reference[2] - seems worthy of course - seems hydrogen, carbon dioxide with iron-nickel-sulfur minerals (pentlandite?) may be primary ingredients in the primordial soup (so-to-speak) - part of the "Iron–sulfur world hypothesis"? - Thanks again for the reference - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:44, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Happy Monday: [1].[3] Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 04:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for the ref[3] re possible origin of eukaryotes - *excellent* review imo - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:46, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Another new paper, this one on a simulation of sugar synthesis in space: "Ribose and related sugars from ultraviolet irradiation of interstellar ice analogs." [2].[4] Not sure if to use this. CHeers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 01:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for the ref[4] - seems ribose may have been created from water, methanol and ammonia - under simulated interstellar conditions in the laboratory - agreed - not sure if the study is sufficiently worthy to present atm either, although there seems to be some interest about the study in the news after a casual google search - in any regards - Thanks for sharing the link - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:41, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ a b Staff (February 3, 2016). "How Terrestrial Life's Building Blocks May Have First Formed". Retrieved February 4, 2016. 
  2. ^ a b Sojo, Victor; Herschy, Barry; Whicher, Alexandra; Camprubi, Eloi; Lane, Nick (January 12, 2016). "The Origin of Life in Alkaline Hydrothermal Vents - Review Article". Astrobiology (journal). 16 (2): 181–197. doi:10.1089/ast.2015.1406. Retrieved March 12, 2016. 
  3. ^ a b Schirber, Michael (March 15, 2016). "A disputed origin for Eukaryotes". NASA. Retrieved April 4, 2016. 
  4. ^ a b Meinert, Cornelia; et al. (April 8, 2016). "Ribose and related sugars from ultraviolet irradiation of interstellar ice analogs". Science (journal). 352 (6282): 208–212. doi:10.1126/science.aad8137. Retrieved April 7, 2016. 

Life timeline[edit]

Hi! I see you've been adding {{Life timeline}} to a whole lot of articles. Several of them are good or featured articles. May I suggest that you slow down your enthusiasm and ask for input on articles' talk pages before adding the template? I'm sure it will be welcomed by many; but some articles already have their own version of timelines, or other templates in place, and editors may have objections or ideas about placement. — Gorthian (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@Gorthian: Thank you for your comments - yes - agreed - no problem whatsoever - tried to add the {{Life timeline}} template to relevant articles - as a possible improvement - however - please understand that it's *entirely* ok with me to rm/rv/mv/ce the {{Life timeline}} templates (and/or related edits) of course - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:35, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Space barnstar - Gravitational wave[edit]

Space-Barnstar-1j.png The Space Barnstar
For your quick involvement in the development of the article Gravitational wave observation which is noted on Wikipedia's main page In the news section! --Pine 20:36, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
@Pine: Wow! - Thank you *very much* - *entirely* unexpected - and *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 21:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)


I removed the "hatted template" you added to the recently started discussion on the evolution talk page, as it constitutes vandalism, please do not add it back, if you wish to contribute to the discussion feel free to do so without being disruptive, thanks. Willietell (talk) 23:49, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

The "hatted template" was added to the thread because you are trying to promote blatant anti-science propaganda and hypocritical lies, and not actually discuss anything at all. Ergo the template is not vandalism, and it stays as you blatantly demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of science.--Mr Fink (talk) 23:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I want to apologize to USER:Drbogdan as I thought it was you who added the "hatted template" and I was wrong. I am sorry for not looking closely enough and for jumping to conclusions and coming here and accusing you of such a thing. I hope you can accept my apologies. Willietell (talk) 00:11, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

@Willietell: Thank you for your comments - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 01:52, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Cult film[edit]

Hi there. I wanted to explain why I reverted your edit to cult film. The topic of this article is cult films, not transgressive pornographic films. That means that the sources must describe the phenomenon of cult films explicitly, not indirectly discuss related concepts. This is kind of important, as the article is a GA, and it could be delisted if people add their own original research. Certainly, sexploitation, erotic, and pornographic films are a part of the cult film umbrella, but to discuss them in more detail, we'd need sources to explicitly describe them in the context of how they relate to cult films as a whole. The other problem is the article is already a bit too long, and adding even more detail about specific films is kind of overdoing it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Thank you *very much* for your comments re the reverted edit on the "Cult film" article - your comments are *greatly* appreciated - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


Hello! I just noticed that the ExoMars articles do not show a map of the 2 selected landing sites. The lander will go down in Meridiani Planum, but I do not find any annotated map that can be useful. Any advice and help will be appreciated. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 06:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for your comments - *so far*, unable to find such a PD annotated map either - although found a possibly relevant reference,[1] with an unavailable (ie, non-PD ESA) map image - the reference itself may (or may not) be helpful - Thanks again for your comments - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:01, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
That is VERY good. It even indicates other important landers. I will load it next. Thank you. BatteryIncluded (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
FYI: Link to ExoMars launch (Livestream begins on March 14, 2016 at 08:30 GMT [03:30 AM EDT]):[2][3] Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 19:41, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I like it that the Europeans have very well defined long-term goals: [3].[4] CHeers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 14:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thanks for posting - yes - I agree about the well-defined goals[4] as well - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:52, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ Vago, Jorge (April 3, 2014). "Scientists Favor Four ExoMars Landing Sites". NASA. Retrieved March 10, 2016. 
  2. ^ Staff (March 10, 2016). "Live Video - ExoMars Launch (March 14, 2016, 08:30 GMT)". Livestream. Retrieved March 10, 2016. 
  3. ^ Staff (March 10, 2016). "Watch ExoMars Launch (March 14, 2016, 08:30 GMT [03:30 AM EDT]". ESA. Retrieved March 10, 2016. 
  4. ^ a b Staff (March 29, 2016). "Release of the First Roadmap for European Astrobiology". Retrieved April 2, 2016. 

NASA Briefings/livestream (March 22, 2016) – Ceres, Mars, Pluto.[edit]

NASA Briefings/livestream – Experts to discuss the latest Ceres, Mars, Pluto results (near Houston, TX; March 21 – 22, 2016)[1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Followup - studies re Pluto[2][3] - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:47, 18 March 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ Brown, Dwayne; Cantillo, Laurie; Jeffs, William; Tygielsli, Julie (March 16, 2016). "Media Advisory M16-029 - Planetary Conference to Feature Ceres, Mars, Pluto Science Results (March 21 - 22, 2016)". NASA. Retrieved March 17, 2016. 
  2. ^ Talbert, Tricia (March 17, 2016). "Science Papers Reveal New Aspects of Pluto and its Moons". NASA. Retrieved March 18, 2016. 
  3. ^ Talbert, Tricia (March 17, 2016). "Top New Horizons Findings Reported in Science". NASA. Retrieved March 18, 2016. 

Popular press and primary sources[edit]

We do not typically use popular press for medical content. We also tend to stay away from primary sources. This is a primary source.[4] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

@Doc James: Thanks for your comments (re "Health" & related articles) - yes - agreed - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:16, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Anjan Contractor[edit]

Hi Dr Bogdan, I saw you tend to go to conferences and understand science. Can you review Anjan Contractor, up for deletion? I work in a 'maker lab' in his home town of Houston, so I know him. But I also know that his 3D food printer for nasa is up for inclusion in the Smithsonian. He's also gotten a ton of press from 2013 to literally yesterday. Perhaps it's too advertorial and can be cut back?3Dnasa (talk) 17:49, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

@3Dnasa: Thank you for your comments - and request - busy at the moment but perhaps I'll take a look at the article at my next opportunity - Thanks again for your comments and all - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:25, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Environmental impact[edit]

Hi Dennis, I created an essay regarding the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement on Meta and I am now looking for ideas regarding the project. I saw that you're interested in sustainability, so I'd love to hear your comments and maybe even have your support! Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 21:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

@Gnom: Thank you for your comments - yes - seems worthy of consideration (at least) of course - may take a closer look at the next opportunity - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 23:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Proteins in outer space[edit]

Paper[1] "This finding may appear to undermine currently held hopes that life will be found on nearby planets, but it is important to be aware that the presence of ice and water are by themselves not sufficient; there has to be an atmosphere which includes water vapour at a sufficiently high partial pressure for proteins to be active." Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 17:03, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for the link - seems relevant to life as we know it of course - reminds me of one of my published NYT comments (or actual NYT link)[2] re life-forms thriving without much water at all - nonetheless - study seems very interesting - Thanks again for the link - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:57, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
I knew exposed proteins cannot maintain their tertiary form without water, but I was surprised that it is also true with low atmospheric pressure. Of course, this does not apply to spores. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:40, 26 March 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ Seddon, Gavin M.; Bywater, Robert Paul (December 9, 2015). "The fate of proteins in outer space". International Journal of Astrobiology. doi:10.1017/S1473550415000488. Retrieved March 26, 2016. 
  2. ^ Bogdan, Dennis (June 3, 2008). "Comment - Life Can Thrive Without Water?". New York Times. Retrieved March 26, 2016. 

Oxford Journal articles[edit]

Slow Sunday? Take a pick: [5]. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:20, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thanks for the link re "Cambridge Journal" articles - and some *very* interesting titles of course - may have a closer look at the next opportunity - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
@BatteryIncluded: BRIEF Followup - if interested, one of my doings today resulted in another published Comment[1] in the "New York Times" - and is related to a worthy (imo) article[2] about humans and other apes by Frans de Waal - my latest comment is based, in part, on my earlier published Comment[3] (in 2008) that seemed relevant to the new 2016 article as well - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:57, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Very good article. I shared it in my Facebook wall. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 03:01, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
@BatteryIncluded: Thanks again for your comments - Yes - I thought the NYT article[2] to be very good as well - and shared the article[1] on my Facebook page also (if interested, at this FB link) - in any regards - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:59, 11 April 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ a b Bogdan, Dennis (April 10, 2016). "Comment - Learning From Tickling Apes?". New York Times. Retrieved April 10, 2016. 
  2. ^ a b Waal, Frans de (April 10, 2016). "What I Learned From Tickling Apes". New York Times. Retrieved April 10, 2016. 
  3. ^ Bogdan, Dennis (June 17, 2008). "Comment - Humans Are Best In The Univerrse?". New York Times. Retrieved April 10, 2016. 

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg While researching about Breakthrough Starshot I created a standalone article. I noticed your edits on Breakthrough Initiatives and I think you might be interested in contributing to the article also. nafSadh did say 00:32, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
@Nafsadh: Thank You for your post - it's *greatly* appreciated - yes - contributing to your newly created "Breakthrough Starshot" article may be a possibility of course - in any regards - Thanks again for your post - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Tetra quark: Déjà vu?[edit]

FYI: [6]. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 19:31, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Isambard Kingdom: Thank you for your comments - yes - seems so - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) 19:52, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Mars methane[edit]

No methane release during the second year. The first detection was "episodic"; it is not "seasonal": [1] Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 14:10, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thanks for your comments - yes - interesting re Martian methane levels - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2016 (UTC)


Mars 2020[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Unnamed 2020 Mars rover mission. Since you had some involvement with the Unnamed 2020 Mars rover mission redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:25, 10 June 2016 (UTC)


I have nominated Exoplanet for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKay (talk) 08:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

An Administrator's Barnstar for you![edit]

Administrator Barnstar Hires.png The Administrator's Barnstar
Thank you for your edit on "Black Hole Information Paradox" Editor1729 (talk) 13:10, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
@Editor1729: Thank you *very much* for the Barnstar - it's *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 19:39, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Abiogenesis Equation[edit]

Hello. Do you think we should mention this?:[1][2] Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:36, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for your post - and refs[1][2] - flexible atm - a very brief mention *may* be relevant (perhaps more detail if the ref is published in a better (ie, peer-reviewed) journal than PNAS - and/or - is referenced in better journals) - of course - wait-and-see would be *entirely* ok with me as well - hope this helps in some way - iac - Thanks again for the post/refs - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 01:59, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ a b Lewin, Sarah (July 8, 2016). "New Equation Tallies Odds of Life Beginning". Retrieved July 8, 2016. 
  2. ^ a b Scharf, Caleb; Cronin, Leroy (May 17, 2016). "Quantifying the origins of life on a planetary scale". PNAS. doi:10.1073/pnas.1523233113. Retrieved July 8, 2016. 


I notice you put both of these on {{Human timeline}}. These only have any effect on user and user talk pages. It has no effect in the template namespace (because it's already indexed) or article space (because such user control is disabled there). What's its purpose? Also having both is redundant because {{INDEX}} just adds __INDEX__ anyway. Additionally, the way you added it introduced extra vertical space - in fact, a whole extra paragraph - which is something you should always be careful to avoid in templates. Hairy Dude (talk) 14:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

@Hairy Dude: Thank you *very much* for your clarifications - and suggestions - yes - agreed - no problem whatsoever - noted pages have now been amended and updated - hope this is now *entirely* ok - please let me know if otherwise of course - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Nature timeline[edit]

If you check my recent contribs, you'll see I've removed the nature timeline in some articles. Please be careful when adding them where they may not be relevant enough or be totally off-topic. Same thing in the gravity article now, the nature timeline doesn't seem to be related in any way to the section, so I intend to revert it. Cheers, FabulousFerd (talk) 15:27, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

@FabulousFerd: Thank you for your comments - {{Nature timeline}} was added to the "Gravity" article since the template seems relevant (for context) and is specifically linked to the "Gravity" article - the template has been restored to the article - please discuss on "Talk:Gravity" - for "WP:CONSENSUS" - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:04, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
I removed the {{Nature timeline}} template from 3 articles that were not mentioned in the template. Please update the template to include the relevant article before you add the template to the article. Thank you for your great contributions. Brian Everlasting (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
@Brian Everlasting: Thank you for your comments - and suggestions - yes - agreed - no problem whatsoever - although rv good faith edit in "Cosmic microwave background" article since "CMB" is linked (as "Earliest light") in the "Nature timeline" after all - nonetheless - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:14, 31 July 2016 (UTC)


Would you like to be nominated for adminship? I would nominate you if you would like to be an administrator. Brian Everlasting (talk) 15:41, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

@Brian Everlasting: Thank you *very much* for your comments - and - for suggesting "nominating" me to be an "Administrator" - it's *greatly* appreciated - however - at the moment, I'm not interested in being an "Administrator" - I thoroughly enjoy editing in my usual (non-Administrator) way these days - nonetheless - Thank you *very much* for suggesting "nominating" me - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:12, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

KIC 8462852 re: Gaia data[edit]

i dont know wiki tags very well, your edit is much cleaner. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments - they're greatly appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:58, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Talk:KIC 8462852 - editing comments[edit]

Hello. You may want to check you're au fait with Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_comments after some of your edits on Talk:KIC 8462852 lately. It's misleading for you to edit your own comment to remove all capslock and acknowledge that the source you're presenting is unreliable after someone has replied to your original comment saying that the source seems unreliable and making a reference to the capslock. It makes it look as if the second editor has missed your point about reliable sourcing and is repeating you, and is shouting in capslock because they themselves are angry about it. This is very confusing to someone who reads the thread at face value. --McGeddon (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@McGeddon: Thank you for your comments re my "edit" on "Talk:KIC 8462852#gaia data wholly misrepresented by previous edit" - and your "later corrections" - at the time, I intended my edit to be a good faith improvement to my post - to better read the post - yes - agreed - my edit could be interpretable on a closer review - in any regards - Thank you *very much* for your comments (and corrections) of course - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2016 (UTC)


Hubble space telescope spots some newsworthy images of Europa: [7]. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for posting the ref[1] re news about Europa and related water vapor plumes - interesting - seems there's a NASA news conference with more details at 2 p.m. EDT (1800 GMT) on Monday (September 26, 2016) - Thanks again for the ref - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ Wall, Mike (September 20, 2016). "NASA to Announce 'Surprising' Europa Discovery Monday". Retrieved September 21, 2016. 

Life timeline - You're welcome[edit]

Thanks for the thank-you re Template:Life timeline: I was hesitant to tamper with the complex structure that i could not have created, for lack of both template saavy and subject-matter knowledge. It's good to have the feedback that "putting my oar in" was at worst harmless.
--Jerzyt 14:51, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@Jerzy: Thank you for your comments - and suggested adj to the {{Life timeline}} template - yes - agreed - the adj is more precise of course - I paused a bit re the adj at first since I've been trying to present the timeline milestones (wikilinked to articles with more details - and precision) to be as "reader-friendly" as possible - to be as accessible to readers as possible - (please see related timeline comments at => "Template talk:Nature timeline#Best wording" - OR - ) - nonetheless, your recent suggested adj may be ok at the moment - and is appreciated - in any case - Thanks again for your comments and timeline adj - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)