User talk:Kvng

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

New listing[edit]

Hi, you recently marked one of my listings for deletion as being promotional, could you advise on the changes it needs? The text is below.

@Ultrapreneur: The user name you've chosen indicates you may need to be made aware of the conflict of interest policy. I'm afraid I won't be able to help with this. Maybe try the WP:TEAHOUSE. I have deleted your text here. You can retrieve a copy from history if you need. ~Kvng (talk) 23:54, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Money.Net[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Money.Net. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Linebreaks formatting[edit]

Hi! I wouldn't bother with edits like these, the MediaWiki parser cleans all the tags in wikitext and turns both <br> or <br /> into <br /> on output. -- intgr [talk] 16:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I know, but it confuses syntax highlighting in my wikicode editor. I'm not going to start a campaign or anything, just fix them up when it is especially bad and I am doing other work on an article. ~Kvng (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

The future of NPP and AfC/Work group[edit]

Hi Kvng,

In view of the huge and sudden backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed since mid 2016, the WMF has begun a dialogue in a quest to examine the situation and possible solutions. Please consider commenting there if you have not already done so. It is highly recommended to read it all before it becomes too long to follow. The project is at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Analysis and proposal, and its talk page.


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

acridine orange[edit]

I strongly disagree with the corrections made to the topic "acridine orange". The information and the link that remain pertain only to the application of this dye for microbiology. Its application in cytometry of somatic and germ vertebrate cells, which was developed in my laboratory, exceeds by orders of magnitude the historical already application of acridine orange in microbiolology. Here are some our papers on acridine orange applications with the numbers of how many times they were cited in biomedical literature (Thomson-Reuters):

  • Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Sharpless T, Melamed MR. (1976) Lymphocyte stimulation: A rapid multiparameter analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 73:2881-2884 (cited 458 times)
  • Evenson DP, Darzynkiewicz Z, Melamed MR. (1980) Relation of mammalian sperm chromatin heterogeneity to fertility. Science 210:1131-1133, 1980 (cited 454 times).
  • Traganos F, Darzynkiewicz Z, Sharpless T, Melamed MR. (1977) Simultaneous staining of ribonucleic and deoxyribonucleic acids in unfixed cells using acridine orange in a flow cytofluorometric system. J Histochem Cytochem 25:46-56 (cited 446 times).
  • Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Melamed MR. (1980) New cell cycle compartments identified by multiparameter flow cytometry. Cytometry 1:98-108 (cited 315 times).
  • Darzynkiewicz Z, Sharpless T, Staiano-Coico L, Melamed MR. (1980) Subcompartments of the G1 phase of cell cycle detected by flow cytometry. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 77:6696-6700 (cited 261 times).
  • Andreeff M, Darzynkiewicz Z, Sharpless TK, Clarkson BD, Melamed MR. (1980) Discrimination of human leukemia subtypes by flow cytometric analysis of cellular DNA and RNA. Blood 55:282-293 (cited 257 times).
  • Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Sharpless TK, Melamed MR. (1975) Conformation of RNA in situ as studied by acridine orange staining and automated cytofluorometry. Exp Cell Res 95:143-153 (cited 201 times).
  • . Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Kapuscinski J, Staiano-Coico L, Melamed MR. (1984) Accessibility of DNA in situ to various fluorochromes: Relationship to chromatin changes during erythroid differentiation of Friend leukemia cells. Cytometry 5:355-363 (cited 231 times).
  • Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Sharpless T, Melamed MR. (1975) Thermal denaturation of DNA in situ as studied by acridine orange staining and automated cytofluorometry. Exp Cell Res 90:411-428 (cited 192 times).
  • Crissman HA, Darzynkiewicz Z, Tobey RA, Steinkamp JA. (1985) Correlated measurements of DNA, RNA and protein content in individual cells by flow cytometry. Science 228:1321-1324 (cited 147 times).

In these papers we describe the application of acridine orange to: differentally stain DNA vs RNA, measure in situ DNA denaturation in individual cells as a probe of chromatin structure, in the case of sperm cells to detect abnormal, infertile spermatozoa(this method, was expanded by my student Don Evenson as the chromatin structure assay and was formally accepted by WHO as one the most useful male fertility assays, and many other applications. Given the above I cannot agree that none of these applications is not mentioned in Wikipedia.Zbigniew Darzynkiewicz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:03, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Zbigniew Darzynkiewicz: are you sure you've contacted the right editor? I have never worked on Acridine orange. ~Kvng (talk) 20:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

How I can found who deleted all my additions to "acridine orange"? - to whom should I respondZbigniew Darzynkiewicz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Zbigniew Darzynkiewicz: click the View History tab. The culprit was JohnSRoberts99. You should copy this discussion to the article's talk page and work it out there. ~Kvng (talk) 20:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Joachim Frank[edit]

Hi Kvng, I'm not sure why you accepted Joachim Frank, given it was almost entirely unsourced biographical content. I've removed the unsourced content and done some cleanup, though it still needs more work. Could you be more careful in future, please? We should take WP:BLP very seriously. Thank you! Waggie (talk) 19:10, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Waggie: WP:BLP requires that contentious material be sourced. Do you beleive the material that I accepted and that you removed was contentious? ~Kvng (talk) 19:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Kvng, thanks for your reply. From WP:BLP: "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source." I challenged it (in my comment on the draft), and when it went to mainspace without further discussion or correction, I went ahead and removed it. Do you have reliable, published sources for the content? Are you really arguing that paragraphs of unsourced biographical content are OK? I'm a bit confused here and I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding. Thank you for your time! Waggie (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
@Waggie: Primary WP:AFC acceptance criteria is that a submission be WP:LIKELY to survive WP:AFD. The article as I accepted it had problems but not problems that would require deleting it. Specifically, if you had nominated my accepted version for deletion, the AfD response would have likely been, no need to delete the article, just delete the challenged material. This you've done and I have no problem with those edits. Thanks! What I do have a problem with is the idea that an article needs to be free of major flaws before it can get out of AFC. This is what you seem to be asserting in your first message to me and it is not true. ~Kvng (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear, I was implying that I believe the problems should have been corrected before moving it to mainspace (as the content had been challenged). I did not accept OR decline the draft because I was hoping the author would correct them. Teach a person to fish and all that. Thanks again! Waggie (talk) 20:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
@Waggie: New editors may not have the skills required to make the improvements you're asking for. Wikipedia works best as a collaboration and there is little of that in Draft space. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewer help § Please accept flawed articles on notable topics. ~Kvng (talk) 20:21, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Zbyszek Darzynkiewicz[edit]

Thanks for your critical but valuable comments. I tried to improve my page - I hope I am on right way. Best regardsZbigniew Darzynkiewicz (talk) 20:04, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Zbigniew Darzynkiewicz: Writing an article about yourself is difficult to do correctly and is strongly discouraged. Please see Wikipedia:Autobiography. ~Kvng (talk) 20:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated[edit]

Thanks for reviewing Shaurya Bhardwaj, Kvng.

Unfortunately Winged Blades of Godric has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Regretably WP:CSD#G4 isn't suitable.It is used to prevent re-mainspacing of deleted version of articles.I'm redirecting the article per the AFD close(since no new substantial notability arguments have been added).If he chooses to revert this ,WP:ANI will come handy.

To reply, leave a comment on Winged Blades of Godric's talk page.

Winged Blades Godric 16:03, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposal to merge merge List of vice presidents in 2017 into List of current vice presidents and designated acting presidents.[edit]

Where can I find the discussion page? I am absolutely against. What is the reason? There is nowhere a chronological list of vice-presidents. Bogdan Uleia (talk)

@Bogdan Uleia: I have started a discussion at Talk:List of current vice presidents and designated acting presidents#Merge List of vice presidents in 2017. ~Kvng (talk) 13:57, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Kvng. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:17, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Isaac Newton in popular culture[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Isaac Newton in popular culture. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated[edit]

Thanks for reviewing Illathu Nair, Kvng.

Unfortunately PRehse has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

This seems like a duplication of Nair now that all that copyvio has been removed

To reply, leave a comment on PRehse's talk page.

PRehse (talk) 15:50, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Moon Breath Beat[edit]

Permission to remove my Moon Breath Beat page granted. Espngeek (talk)

Illathu Nair[edit]

There are no details available for Illathu Nair in Wikipedia and no article written on Illathu Nair yet in Wikipedia, this article perhaps helps people to understand about the different group existed in Nair group. These days Nairs are generalized as sudra category, its very important to give awareness to public that Nair community had both Kshatriya and Sudra group existed in this community same like Singh community where Kshatriya, Bhrahmin, Sudra and Sikh exist in the group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nair Community (talkcontribs) 19:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Nair Community, I have copied this to Talk:Nair#Merge from Illathu Nair where it is more likely to be seen. ~Kvng (talk) 12:05, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Kvng , unfortunately i cant write in the Nair article. Appreciate if you could add the Nair Subcaste table given in the Illathu Nair article to the Nair article. Also i dispute statement //"They regarded all Nairs as shudra" "were given kshatriya functions, but only shudra status. Thus originated the Nairs."//. These are totally absurd and fancy of one person. Please consider the Mandal commission report of Government of India where it clearly classify the different type of Nairs. The Malayala Kshatriya Nairs are considered forward caste and Malayala Shudra Nairs are considered as Other Backward community by the Indian Government. Please do needful for correction and please help stop spreading the wrong information to public.

Why can't you write in the Nair article? ~Kvng (talk) 12:24, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

It has no edit option. Extended Protected Page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nair Community (talkcontribs) 12:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Looks like Nair is a protected page due to sensitive topic with history of conflict. Only more experienced editors (30 days + 500 edits) are allowed to contribute there. You are a newcomer to Wikipedia. Such restrictions are unusual but I assume the restrictions are in place for a good reason or two. I don't think I can help you further at this time. ~Kvng (talk) 12:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated[edit]

Hi, I'm Winged Blades of Godric. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Kum. Veerabhadrappa, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Winged Blades Godric 16:29, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Costa Rica national team results[edit]

Which difference exists between the Costa Rica national team results and the England team results (For example) which by this day remain untouched?

--AndSalx95 (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

  1. Please have a look at WP:OTHERSTUFF
  2. If you don't agree with what I've done, you are welcome to revert my redirect of this article

~Kvng (talk) 18:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

It is not that I do not agree with your revert. In fact, you stated in the summary that it was per WP:IINFO and from my perspective that seems to be a valid reason to do so. However, in spite of me having about nine years here, I am still very unfamiliar with certain rules and having stumbled upon articles like the England ones, I thought there might be a difference (compared to the Costa Rica ones) which made those articles suitable to be on Wikipedia, a difference which I do not see. I will check on WP:WPF about what to do in this sort of lists. --AndSalx95 (talk) 19:02, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
I admit that I am not fully up on acceptable practice in sport coverage. That's why I redirected instead of nominating the article for deletion. A redirect can be quickly reverted. If you're interested you can learn about which way the editorial winds are currently blowing in this area by spending some time at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Sports#Football. ~Kvng (talk) 19:09, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

KWG Resources and your proposal for deletion[edit]

I have added further facts and a related reference to hopefully demonstrate notability. Hopefully, you will agree and remove the proposal for deletion. I am not comfortable removing it myself without first seeking your views here. This was a page that I had started, but where I had hoped that others would contribute, since this area is not one of Wikipedia contribution focus for me. I nonetheless believe, and hope that you agree, that the activities of KWG Resources in Canada are quite notable.

Dreadarthur (talk) 05:58, 28 June 2017 (UTC) 05:55, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

The new source is not WP:INDEPENDENT and therefore does not help establish notability. Also developing chromite deposits is WP:ROUTINE business. Notability would something that an independent reporter would be interested in reporting on. ~Kvng (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I have added what I believe to be independent references, which hopefully improves. My impression is that KWG Resources is a key developer of a major mineral deposit in Northwestern Ontario, which I believe has one of the largest deposits of chromite in the world. Chromite is very important to steel production. This would appear to be why China is so very interested in assisting in the development here. Both now and in the future, what KWG Resources is doing here would appear to be quite notable, both in Canada and globally. Dreadarthur (talk) 01:01, 29 June 2017 (UTC)