User talk:Vuo

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

Quick links

I'm a Finnish guy, with a M.Sc. Tech. in chemical technology.


...for your contribution to the article Human!Chrisrus (talk) 19:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Shinas (ferry)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Shinas (ferry), and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

How to post an externally verifiable proof[edit]

Hi vuo I am the author of the undone fine chemical article due to an uncertain copyright situation. I have now managed to get the admission from Wiley in pdf to post it on Wikipedia. I cannot post a page at Hikal as you suggested. How can I provide an externally verifiable proof accapted by Wikipedia? Thanks --PeterRPollak (talk) 14:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Editors Barnstar Hires.png The Editor's Barnstar
Good catch on the fluoride nonsense in the MAOI article. Thanks! :D Exercisephys (talk) 03:51, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Party subsidies[edit]

Dear Vuo, if you are still interested in the subject, please check what I have done to your article. Khnassmacher (talk) 15:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


'there's nothing unscientific about photochemistry' I agree but the issue is about 'biophotons' which look to be the pseudoscientific version of photochemistry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtpaley (talkcontribs) 23:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


Hei! Ei se valtioneuvoksen titteli salaneuvoksesta periydy vaan vastaavasta valtioneuvoksen tittelistä, jos mistään. Tuo teksti on nyt väärin artikkelissa Valtioneuvos. --Pxos (talk) 21:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I removed the sentence about derivative titles altogether as unsourced and very likely incorrect. --Pxos (talk) 22:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Sissi (Finnish light infantry)/ famous sissi troops[edit]

I'll add a longer comment about the matter here; the United States military states that the only groups within United States military that can be called "Special forces" are the United States Army Special Forces (aka. "Green berets") and 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (aka. "Delta Force"), end of discussion. Ape89 (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

in addition to the last comment; because US military is strict about the distinction while pretty much everyone else seems to call every American special operations forces -unit just "specia forces" I think it's necessary to use the (more or less-) full name of the "Green berets" when it is the US Army Special Forces that the article/notion in an article is about. Also sorry for the double post. Ape89 (talk) 00:44, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Varma move[edit]

I'm a bit taken aback by your move of Varma to Varma (name) in order to allow the former to be used as the page for a Finnish company. I'm particularly taken aback given that immediately prior to that move, you left this edit summary elsewhere. Your move was bold but I doubt that it is without controversy, so it might be better to revert and open a discussion. - Sitush (talk) 22:31, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I understood it so that Varma is an alternate spelling, and as such it should not be primary title of the article in the first place. It appears to be so because a-macron is harder to enter than just 'a'. For instance, I have moved 'Jyrki Jarvilehto' to the correct 'Jyrki Järvilehto', and I doubt anyone would protest. The article appears to list several alternate spellings, of which any could be selected. Furthermore, articles on names are often of the 'Title (name)' pattern. Your comment on the previous edit is unnecessary and has no relation to this issue. (In there, I just happen to have a pet peeve for people deleting content from an article because it doesn't suit their whatever.) --vuo (talk) 22:48, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
It is not so much an alternate spelling (eg: Brown/Browne, White/Whyte) as a name with a shared theme: India is a country with well in excess of 20 official languages and names there are often based on honorific or caste-related themes: historic transliteration between them is affected also by by recent transliteration from the various scripts to Western alphabets but the pronunciation remains distinct. Given the size of the India/Pakistani etc population and its diaspora, Varma and its variants are incredibly common. I see that you've now created a dab page: that is better but I'm still not entirely convinced. I've got no particular horse in this race: I've no connections to the subcontinent or to Finland etc. I'll have a think. - Sitush (talk) 10:53, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
You might want to compare to the situation at the Finnish Wikipedia. In particular: --vuo (talk) 22:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I've had a long think about this and I am going to be reverting you per WP:COMMONNAME. I don't care what Finnish WP might say, Varma is by far more common as an Indian surname than some insurance outfit. If Finnish WP want to do things differently then that is up to them but, obviously, they've got a systemic bias when it comes to representation of Finland-based articles. I have spoken to someone else about this and they agreed ... but I've forgotten who it was! I'll see if I can dig out that info before reverting, just so that you can see the rationale. - Sitush (talk) 16:06, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't believe that Wikipedia has a "bias", or should avoid a "bias", etc.; that's terminology from journalism. It's not the job of Wikipedia to represent things in any sort of an "equal" way, because there's no "airtime" to share; anyone writing "Varma" to the search page has only one click extra effort to choose which page he meant. Having a disambiguation page is an inherently neutral choice. Trying to put "larger" or "more important" things first leads to unavoidable and unnecessary arguments about the hierarchy. Also, WP:COMMONNAME is about another topic, choosing between possible names, not about disambiguation. --vuo (talk) 08:24, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 :WP:SYSTEMIC? You entire rationale in renaming was that the financial services outfit was better known. Which it is not. - Sitush (talk) 09:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
My whole argument is that it doesn't matter which is better known. There's no "bias", there's even no need to avoid a "bias". --vuo (talk) 08:43, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


Hi Vuo, I removed that paragraph because it (especially the second sentence) made no sense. Why would Comecon want to thwart Soviet influence? Heavy Knife (talk) 22:05, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Can we keep looking at FL angle[edit]

Your concerns are well taken, but the article needs to not just be written for synth org folks like me, rather it has to include the biochemists (who are actually measuring such angle crystallographically), and it has to be clear how it is similar to but different from the BD. As it stands, the figure is so confusing, the legend has to become enormous to make clear to readers what the angle actually means. Also, it has to be clear that while Bürgi, Dunitz, et al measured angles in crystal structures to get this whole field going, with the FL, the numeric angle values of the trajectories are inferred (based on reaction outcomes and product ratios)—this plus a very little bit of theoretical work. Then there is the confusion engendered on the BD side, that cannot be allowed to spill onto the FL side —"the BD angle is 107 deg", as opposed to 107 in simple systems, and whatever else it might actually be measured to be in any other system studied (e.g., approaching 90 deg in proteases apparently). When you put these explanatory challenges alongside the problem with the image, we are faced with a daunting task. We either parrot what is in undergraduate textbooks (often incorrect); or we are encyclopedic, and write for all, including the laypersons, and those interested most in chemistry, biochemistry, crystallography, etc.

Bottom line, I want your fine mind involved in this. My vote would be we improve the FL image, then begin to discuss your specific objections to the "wall of text". The real concept and breadth is not as easy as a short lede and one picture (though with a good picture, a better lede could easily be written, before getting into the details). Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 21:47, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Flippin out[edit]

Really do want you involved, to help make this practically useful. Ping me any time with ideas—especially, if you have a good secondary source you you want to discuss, or the like. ALWAYS WELCOME. (Look back in a couple of days, new images going in.) Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't been involved in this for a while. As it stands the article is quite far from being a general text, and it would take consirable expertise to bring it to that point, which I admit I don't have. Originally, I got involved as a student of Koskinen, but I haven't been there for half a decade. --vuo (talk) 21:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

re Fm and Md acac[edit]

Yup, I'm officially not thinking. Thank you for correcting me! Double sharp (talk) 22:20, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Finnish language in Soviet ruble article[edit]

You reverted my edit with explanation "Finnish language, not Finland; Finnish was a language of the Soviet Union also"
Well, the part is in a table with this just above it: The name of the currency in the languages of the 15 republics, in the order they appeared in the banknotes:
Finland was not a republic of Soviet Union, nor was Finnish name of ruble in the banknotes (as you can see from the reverse of 1961 ruble note in the infobox).
Of Finnish being language of Soviet Union, that should belong to Languages of the Soviet Union. Which claims (without source) that Finnish was "not generally considered a language of the USSR", but was official in Karelia. (talk) 01:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the idea was that Finnish was an official language in Karelia. Since the Soviet Union was an ethnically diverse country, a dividing line on which languages to include and not include is always arbitrary. However, I think it would be better to err on the side of providing more information than less, since the number of languages is still fairly limited. Finnish could be counted as a language in which native use of the words "rupla" and "kopeekka" within the Soviet Union, in official contexts, occurred. It was not a "foreign" language. --vuo (talk) 13:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
But is clearly said before the table those are the languages which appeared in banknotes. Finnish did not, so it should be removed from the table. And it also says "in the languages of the 15 republics", and with Finnish there are 16, not 15. (talk) 21:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I didn't notice that. In that case, the languages on the banknotes will of course have preferential treatment. --vuo (talk) 23:51, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Technopolis Oyj[edit]

Hello Vuo,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Technopolis Oyj for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. ubiquity (talk) 14:29, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Ural–Altaic languages[edit]

Our edit-warrior is back. — kwami (talk) 20:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Sibilant offglide[edit]

Hello Vuo, I have a question about an edit of yours at Talk:Palatalization (phonetics)#Sibilant offglide. Regards, — Sebastian 04:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)