This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Vsmith

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

the Moon
Moon phase 3.png
2nd quarter,

85%

Please note - rules of the game! I usually answer comments & questions on this page rather than on your talk (unless initiated there) to keep the conversation thread together. I am aware that some wikiers do things differently so let me know if you expect a reply on your page and maybe it'll happen :-)

Archives[edit]

Archive list

verifiable content on "Copper Canyon" edit[edit]

Hi Vsmith, I made an edit to a incorrect opening statement. The current opening statement "six distinct rivers..." is misleading and if it is correct then the rivers could easily be named by the individual whose statement was accepted. I made a correction years ago but I think it was overwritten, and nobody challenged it concerning geography. I recented was encouraged by several people to revisit the error. I have all the pertinent INEGI maps, but they are not readily available as a resource, except at Mexico state capitals. I would be glad to cite them. Please describe the standard format for a 1:50000 topo, for instance "San Juanito G13A12 1:50000 (C)1978". I also added a ==Geography== section. There should also be a Geology section which I will add with some verifiable sources once I revisit the site to see if my changes were accepted.

Chappedhide (talk) 01:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Government produced topographic maps are valid references. For the example you provided it seems that a bit more info would be needed (the government agency producing the map). I often use USGS topo maps as references, as an example see the Eaudevie, Missouri stub article in which I recently referenced two USGS topo maps. Basically provide the agency or company producing the map, the scale and date published and either a link if accessible online or other info. Vsmith (talk) 04:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Stop it[edit]

Can you stop reverting because metric on this article has to be primary no matter if the CanAm is American majority. Also that is not benefiting Canadians it’s confusing Canadians. Conversions to metric will not work on benefiting Canadians. Metric as primary is benefiting Canadians. Period. Now stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MetricSupporter89 (talkcontribs) 19:33, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Speak to yourself mate - and address the concern re: WP:MOS on the article talk. Vsmith (talk) 19:40, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Current Mayor of Gilbert, Arizona[edit]

VSmith I made a draft page for the current Mayor of Gilbert, Arizona Jenn Daniels. Could you help me get it live on Wikipedia? Any help would be appreciated. NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 16:36, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

That is rather bare. You need more info and supporting references along with wikilinks to other articles. Vsmith (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I will work on it. I understood that the way to start a page is to go with something bare, get it approved, and then add to it. I will give it another go. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickWikiAccount1708 (talkcontribs) 19:59, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

I have added to the page for Jenn Daniels. Does it include enough content now for it to move from draft to active? NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Content improvement, now you need to convert those external links into references an the Wikipedia link as a simple link. I see you have been provided with good advise and links on your talk page. Go and study those. Vsmith (talk) 21:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC) Thank you for reviewing the Jenn Daniels page and your candid guidance. I have updated it considerably since you looked at it. I hope that you find what I have included to be much more acceptable than what you saw. I appreciate your help and guidance. NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 23:16, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:METRIC[edit]

I don’t think you’ve read WP:METRIC. It says that articles about other stuff than just America has to use si units and non si units approved for si use. That section shows that we benefit more by having metric first according to WP:METRIC. MetricSupporter89 (talk) 04:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Common Era[edit]

It would be useful to find a source for the material with the 2015 fact tag. I thought about reverting but didn't, partially because of that It seems probably accurate but if this is a sock they probably know about restoring unsourced material. I don't think the editor is going to be around long. Doug Weller talk 15:55, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

That first sentence does need a source ... but saw no reason for removing the rest ... Roll on :) Vsmith (talk) 16:06, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

pennsylvania bluestone[edit]

Please revert my info box or suggest and edit to it. Lets work together. I am not advertising a commercial product. Such talk does not and will not take place on flagstones.org.Stevenvieczorek (talk) 22:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

You are using Wikipedia to promote a specific product. That promotional image, minus the inline external link, might be acceptable on the Penn bluestone page - but not on the general flagstone page. Your edits indicate that you are mainly interested in promotion - which is not our purpose here. Also you might want to keep track of your reverts. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. If my edits are acceptable on the Pennsylvania Bluestone page I would be happy to leave it there. Would you please revert the bluestone page? Perhaps the flagstone edit I made was a little less relevant than it should be. I promise not to advertise. Thank you for your input.Stevenvieczorek (talk) 10:07, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
SV - To me, flagstone.org appears to be your WordPress blog. Regardless of how neutral the information posted there can be, blogs are not accepted by Wikipedia as reliable sources either for referencing or links in info boxes. David notMD (talk) 13:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

This morning I reverted an edit by SV at Flagstone and an edit by 2600:1700:3260:5420:5951:c161:eab7:ea57 at Pennsylvania Bluestone, both that had created an info box with Vieczorek Natural Stone identified as manufacturer. I also left a note on SV's Talk page that continuing to be promotional could lead to a block. David notMD (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Vsmith (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Stop deleting material you know nothing about and have no right to tamper with![edit]

You had no right deleting included quartz varieties and Chatoyant gems. What's next? Are you going to delete the minerals that are gemstones next? Rockmineralgems (talk) 19:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The reliable source for chatoyant gems is Walter Schumer which is in references every single cat eye variety has been varified in fact I have a cars eye collection that includes each and every mineral variety under Chatoyant gems. Grandidierite cats eye gems were just recently discovered and for sale under six months ago. I purchased the Grandidierite cats eye from a seller in Madagascar last month. It had a lab certificate that it was indeed Grandidierite. On observation it does indeed display a cat eye effect. Rockmineralgems (talk) 19:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Seems the "right" exists - and I be keepin on "tamperin". Thanks for providing the ref above. And your "lab certificate" is quite irrelevant. "the minerals that are gemstones" ... well as the list has no specific reference for each item ... nah (not yet). So please calm your tailfeathers down just a mite. ... and you are welcome. Vsmith (talk) 20:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm working on adding more reliable sources for each of the cat eye gemstones in the list. Many varieties of cat eye gems can be found online for sale such as on eBay and Etsy as well as DJ fine gems and others. I'm contacting GIA and USM to see if they can be a reliable for this... Rockmineralgems (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Seems ebay, Etsy and sale pages are not valid as references here. If GIA or USM have published info that would be good. Vsmith (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Editors Barnstar Hires.png The Editor's Barnstar
This is for continuing to help clean up the Austin, Texas article and fix mistakes in it. TheCaliBook (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Vsmith (talk) 01:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Need for a sockpuppet invetigation on Bluestone[edit]

Bluestone is a relatively obscure topic. Given the deletion attacks, should I submit a SPI? David notMD (talk) 15:01, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Nevermind. I see you already blocked "Silence of the Socks."David notMD (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, that one was too obvious. :) Vsmith (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
I see that Stevenvieczorek has also been blocked. David notMD (talk) 19:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Richard Dawkins personal life edit[edit]

Hi, I added a section to the talk:Dawkins page on your reversion of my edit, didn’t realise I could message! Much obliged if you reply. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:2E2B:A700:70E0:9EC6:4071:F591 (talk) 00:05, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Replied there. Vsmith (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Infobox flags[edit]

Hey just a question about flags in infoboxs. I added a state and country flag to Columbia, Missouri after seeing some other flags added to city infoboxes, but you reverted it citing MOS:INFOBOXFLAG, which specifically list an exception for settlements. If this is no longer the case that should be changed. Grey Wanderer (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

hmm... well dang ... and you are correct. It seems I've been mistaken yet again, aw well I've undone that. Vsmith (talk) 02:56, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Yonaguni[edit]

Thanks. If you agree with me about the photos the editor added, could you find time to reply to them on the talk page? Or even if you think they belong! Doug Weller talk 14:25, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk page maintenance[edit]

You recently reverted my maintenance changes to Talk:Allegheny River using your administrative rollback power. My changes were trivial, and I believe in accord with WP:TPO. Now, take a look at Talk:Monongahela River. One section has no heading, and another has 'UNTITLED' as the heading. These do not help anyone, especially on mobile, to follow the discussion. Ordinarily a section should have a useful heading. If this situation occurred in an article, any editor would promptly supply a useful heading. It's a good case for doing some maintenance on the talk pages. Sbalfour (talk) 15:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

As long as the posts are not either abusive or completely off topic - just leave them alone is my policy. Talk pages that get cluttered or simply too long should be archived. If a post has no topic/title it would be OK to give it a relevant title, but not required. Vsmith (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

River articles[edit]

I notice you taking an interest in river articles where I also edit. Good stuff, especially your USGS refs. A lot of times I don't have a clue where to verify things. I don't add a lot of text, but do a lot of reorg, especially in the lead. River articles in the wiki are very haphazard. A lot are filled up with indiscriminate lists of towns, tributaries, even townships and other things. An article shouldn't be mostly lists, unless it is a list article. I try to bring a sense of proportion to things. Rivers are often nationally or even internationally known landmarks. Saying a river passes thru Ionia, NY, a tiny hamlet of just a few dozen people unknown outside the local area of the county, doesn't help anyone find the Ohio (Allegheny) River. Saying a river passes thru Pittsburgh, now I can find it. [End of blurb].

Thank for your assistance. Sbalfour (talk) 18:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

You are welcome. And I agree - small communities are relevant for small local streams, but not for large rivers. Vsmith (talk) 20:00, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Iodine protection problem?[edit]

Article Iodine is Autoconfirmed protected. Extended confirmed user Plantsurfer is apparently unable to edit it, because I just had to use my Pending Changes Reviewer right to approve his edit. Extended confirmed implies Autoconfirmed; I'm an extended confirmed user, and I can edit the article. So what the heck? Sbalfour (talk) 21:23, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I was wondering about that myself. I'd be glad of an explanation. Plantsurfer 23:11, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Eh ... I have no clue ?? Maybe just a glitch ... Sorry 'bout that... Vsmith (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

mazatzal mountains[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazatzal_Mountains

This page was excessively devoid of information about the mountains of the Mazatzal. The purpose of the images were to encourage someone from ASU or U of A to actually expand the pages, or at least provoke discussions. You would think the Casinos in the area would fund a professional writer to expand these pages.

Who would be a good contact at U of A to get these pages done right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matrixupgrade (talkcontribs) 21:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea about Univ. of Arizona contacts as my last contact/work there was back around 1975. We don't need a professional writer - just some volunteer with the time and inclination to improve the article. Furthermore, simply overloading a page with large images is no improvement. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 23:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Vaccination[edit]

I don't understand why you did delete the whole section I did add this morning on the page "vaccination". My adds concerned the different types of vaccines that are currently in use. To me, the section I did add was clearly lacking in the previous version of the wikipedia page because, for those who want to understand how it works, we need to distinguish the different kind of vaccines (in fact, all vaccines are not made the same way).

You used the argument "not documented". However, this is not true since I did refer to each wikipedia pages of each specific vaccine. On that each specific vaccines, they refer to all the scientific articles needed. Removing the section I did add is clearly an over-use of your power by deleting the section I added.

Moreover, your deletion is difficult to understand since the section I did add is based on the french section of the same topic that I did modify according to my knowledge of the field (I am a virologist, in permanent position in CNRS, France). That is to say that, by deleting this section, you are somehow stating that you (alone) know more or better than the french-speaking wikipedia community ? Well, if this is such a case, then you should tell it load !

I presume you know "vaccination" is a hot topic (involving unrational reactions from religious people, or people afraid of worldwide conspiracy) and that we need to publish all clear information that will help people to make their own choice based on scientific objective informations (as objective as possible, that is, showing repeatable results). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remy.froissart (talkcontribs) 13:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Your addition had no references. A link to another Wikipedia page is not a reference. Wikipedia requires that you support your additions of content with WP:reliable sources and it is as simple as that. Vsmith (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

well, I still don't understand your obstruction because, somehow, you ask contributors to do double work, that is put the references on two pages, one on the synthetic page (i.e. vaccination in our case) and one on the specific page (i.e. on each vaccine page, in our case). This is non-sense and provoke at least two consequences : (i) it contribute to burden the whole wikipedia because of not necesary duplications of informations within wikipedia and (ii) your behaviour discourage contributors. By the way, please, since you know better on what should be and not be in that page "vaccination", could you please add the information that are now laking on the different types of vaccines that are now used... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remy.froissart (talkcontribs) 06:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Well after looking at the vaccination page, I see that portions of the content are unsourced there as well - so seems to be a more complex problem. And referring to an article with unsourced content as a reason for adding unsourced content elsewhere is rather a bit of nonsense. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 12:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular[edit]

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)[edit]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrators' newsletter – May 2019[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

"You can't remove citations just because authors are creationists or Bible college graduates" says the IP[edit]

Sometimes I despair. I can't think of a better reason. This person is a pain and persistent. It's the middle of the night for me but my old dog, who is dying of renal failure, woke me up and I had to take her out and found this. Many thanks and goodnight. Doug Weller talk 02:50, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

You are welcome. Singing: "We get by with a little help from our friends" and "Old dogs, children, and watermelon wine" Vsmith (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Both great songs. Doug Weller talk 19:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)