User talk:Drbogdan/Archive 7

LIFE, EARTH and the UNIVERSE

"Art of the Nature Timelines on Wikipedia"

{{Hominins}}

Humans

Flowers

Oxygen

Microbes

Water

Earth

Solar System

Milky Way

Universe

(view • discuss)

0.2 Mya
Humans

180 Mya
Flowers

200 Mya
Mammals

240 Mya
Dinosaurs

3500 Mya
Oxygen

4000 Mya
Microbes

4410 Mya
Water

4540 Mya
Earth

(view • discuss)

"Click HERE for my other related image efforts"

Nature highlights

Humans

Flowers

Oxygen

Microbes

Water

Earth

Solar System

Milky Way

Universe

Life on Earth

0.2 Mya
Humans

180 Mya
Flowers

200 Mya
Mammals

240 Mya
Dinosaurs

3500 Mya
Oxygen

4280 Mya
Microorganisms

4410 Mya
Water

4540 Mya
Earth

Location of the Earth in the Universe

Earth

Solar System

Gould Belt

Orion Arm

Milky Way

Local Group

Virgo SCl

Laniakea SCl

Our Universe

HNY 2018

Happy New Year! Best wishes for 2018, —PaleoNeonate – 13:48, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@PaleoNeonate: Thank you very much for the Happy New Year greeting - it's appreciated - Happy New Year to you as well - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:54, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Exoplanet page

Hello Dennis and a Happy New Year to you and yours. Could I just draw your attention to the latest changes on the Exoplanet page. User: Fdfexoex (who seems to have a rather poor history) deleted a properly referenced para with what appeared to be their own personal view. I have reverted back again, asking that they refer the changes to the appropriate Talk page. However, they have reverted back again, without reason or comment. I have no intention of edit warring on such a small subject, but would like your view on whether this is worth taking further? Best, David, David J Johnson (talk) 11:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@David J Johnson: Thank you for your comments - Happy New Year to you and yours as well - added the following edit to the Exoplanet article => "restored (& updated) text/refs - re "Cultural impact" section - seems relevant & worthy - please discuss on talk-page if considered otherwise - per WP:BRD, WP:EDITCONSENSUS & related." - also added updated link to related video => (video (54:56)) - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I removed it again. Some members of the US congress choosing to talk about exoplanets is not of interest to Wikipedia, an international encyclopaedia. Even it were of wider consequence maybe, such as hearings to pass a relevant law, the hearings would not normally be a noteworthy topic. This is just a few politicians doing what they do most of the time – talking about something they do not know much about. It is of no interest of consequence.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 15:44, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks Dennis. Whilst I do not agree with John's comments above, I do see his reasoning. It is just a pity that Fdfexoex cannot explain his changes in the same manner, rather than his usual arrogance. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 18:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Meltdown & Spectre - Redirects

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities. Since you had some involvement with the Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Widefox; talk 12:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

FWIW - no problem whatsoever whatever is decided with this issue - hoped my efforts in making the redirect might be helpful - but apparently not - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 08:39, 9 January 2018 ‎(UTC)

Artificial intelligence

Just checking, did you mean to revert me and to restore that content, or was that an error? The reason you listed appear more applicable to the person who initially added that content. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I just removed the content again. Judging from the edit summary, I'm assuming that DrBogdan restored it by accident.

But even if it was restored on purpose, it still really doesn't belong.

ApLundell (talk) 18:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Barek and ApLundell: yes - seems I restored the edit by accident - but all seems ok now - Thanks for checking - and straightening out things - it's appreciated - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 19:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Clouds of benzonitrile

One more organic molecule in space: benzonitrile, [1] one more precursor of PAHs. BatteryIncluded (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thanks for suggesting the PAH studies - seems *very* interesting - and worth adding to several relevant articles I would think - iac - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 03:07, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

He is persistent: [2]. With the discovery that clumps greater than 0.5 millimeters of microorganisms could be one way for life to spread from planet to planet, he has renewed strength. BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Yes - seems "persistent" may be the right word re the ref - Thanks for sharing - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:31, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

References

Talk:Earth: Image discussion

Hi DrBogdan, would you consider adding your thoughts at a discussion about the inclusion of a phylogenetic tree image at Talk:Earth/Archive 15#Phylogenetic Tree image removed? Cheers, User:HopsonRoad 13:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@HopsonRoad: Thank you for your post - and suggestion - at the moment, the discussion seems well represented - I agree with the current agreements - nonetheless - may monitor the discussion for further developments - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Curiosity rover

Have you come across any info on how high has the rover climb? I think it would be interesting to mention the difference in altitude since its landing. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 01:48, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: - yes - several links are as follows => (By early December, 20016), Curiosity had climbed 541 feet (165 meters) in elevation. - and - (On October 25, 2017), Curiosity had gained 1,073 feet (327 meters) in elevation and driven 10.95 miles (17.63 kilometers) from its landing site. - as well as => Timeline of Mars Science Laboratory#Current status - hope this helps - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:14, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! I checked MLS and Curiosity articles. I missed their Timeline article. Cheers! -BatteryIncluded (talk) 02:22, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Curiosity's view of Gale Crater from the slopes (at 1,073 feet elevation) of Mount Sharp on the planet Mars (video (1:53)) (October 25, 2017)

I thought you may enjoy reading this: [3] Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:54, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: - Thank you for the reference - yes - interesting article - not really surprised at the popularity of Wikipedia among academics - even if their use of Wikipedia is not cited - or admitted - after all - AFAIK - over 1000 PHDs and over 100 MDs edit Wikipedia (the term "over" may be especially relevant since many more may edit Wikipedia anonymously) - Thanks in any regards - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:59, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Mars 2020 mission testing

Aren't you glad testing is done before a $2.1 billion mission is launched? :-) []. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:22, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thanks for the ref - yes - seems like testing before launch is a really, really good thing to do - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 01:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

I heard in the radio that they were really surprised the failure was structural, so 99% they will need to re-design the shield. I wonder if it is the same design used on Curiosity because they were supposed to reduce costs by using the same hardware and load it with a different science payload. Anyway, they seem to have time to design, fabricate and test another one in time for integration and launch without delays. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Interesting to know this cracked heat shield was a spare built for Curiosity: "In fact, the heat shield that encountered the fracture was one of two that was manufactured in support of Curiosity’s mission." In their defense, they are applying forces in excess of 20% needed. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

References

ITN Award: Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua

On 26 January 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua (first primate clones using the SCNT method), which you created and substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Zanhe (talk) 07:35, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

@Zanhe: Thank you for the ITN notification - it's greatly appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:53, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

E-cigarette toxins?

We do not source content about health to primary sources and press releases as you did here. Jytdog (talk) 00:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jytdog: Thank you for the reminder - yes - agreed - primary sources/press releases seem not appreciated in some articles (esp medical ones afaik) - seemed worthy at the time - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again for your comment (and related edit) - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

:) Jytdog (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

References

Advice on vocabulary not including regarding electronic cigarettes/vaping. Is is useful for wiki to offer descriptions of what a Rebuildable Drip Atomizer (RDA) is compared to a Rebuildable Tank Atomizer (RTA), Rebuildable Atomizer (RBA) Rebuildable Drip & Tank Atomizer and as well as what an Atomizer is in general. These are acronyms used not for cigalikes but with Mods. Would you use a source like Vaping.com or is their a better path to follow. I couldn't find anything except for a RED highlighted lack of definition for RTA. Where do you place these things within the wiki pages of this industry's components? RDA's which can be used on both a typical mod or a squonk box mod have become more widely used over the last year with many new designs added by central players.I do not know the extent wiki wants to be the resource for this knowledge. Your direction would be appreciated. Thank you in advance. PhilEdits (talk) 23:22, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@PhilEdits: Thank you for your comments - I may not be the best to answer your questions - seems the best place to ask your question(s) may be on the talk-pages for "Electronic cigarette" or "Electronic cigarette aerosol and liquid" at the following => "Talk:Electronic cigarette" and/or "Talk:Electronic cigarette aerosol and liquid" - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:33, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Codons

Interesting read: Quantum chemistry solves mystery why there are these 20 amino acids in the genetic code. BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thanks for the link - yes - very interesting read - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Photosynthesis

Unrelated, but interesting read: Photosynthesis originated a billion years earlier than we thought, study shows -Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 00:08, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thank you for the link (and related refs) - seems very interesting - and may be supportive of earlier studies (in 2004/2006?) that also seem to suggest that photosynthesis began around 3.4 bya - please see => Photosynthesis#Evolution - the {{Life timeline}} graph may be unaffected since it already indicates the 3.4 bya date - in any case - Thanks again for the link - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:06, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

References

Curiosity rover

Heads up regarding this: Di Gregorio is a co-worker of Wickramasinghe. He too sees Martians in his cereal. I don't feel keen at giving such prominence to those 2 rocks, as they never prompted any further research or controversy. Morphology alone is not a reliable biosignature, so if other notable scientists support him, fine, if not, they should be deleted. IMO. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:53, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

@BatteryIncluded: Thanks for the heads up - yes - agreed - wasn't aware of the connection - ok with me to delete text/images/refs - if I miss any - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:07, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Genius-AlbertEinstein-NationalGeographic-2017Film.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Genius-AlbertEinstein-NationalGeographic-2017Film.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Wcam (talk) 01:18, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

• @Wcam: Image was originally uploaded for the "Genius (2017 film)" article - which has since been renamed, and is now the "Genius (U.S. TV series)" article - however - it's entirely ok with me to do whatever is decided with this particular image - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:07, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

American politics

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information: The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. - Galobtter (talk) 14:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

@Galobtter: Thank you for your post re a recent edit - and note - it's appreciated - I've been aware of the noted regulations since earlier edits in related articles over the years - nonetheless - Thanks again for your post - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology

Hi there! I've noticed that you've been active on Wikpedia, but you haven't been active on WikiProject Pharmacology. Per our policies, your status has been moved from Active to Inactive, which you can view here. Don't be discouraged, though--we'd love to see you come back and contribute to the project! Let me know if you need any help! ―Biochemistry🙴❤ 01:56, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

@Biochemistry&Love: Thank you for your notice - no problem whatsoever - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:28, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

The Joy of Science – Result => KEEP

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Joy of Science is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Joy of Science until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Constant314 (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@Constant314: Thank you for your note - added the following to the relevant discussion page =>

Copied from the "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Joy of Science" page (also, here) :

* Keep − The Joy of Science (Original Author: Drbogdan) is a notable and worthy article for inclusion in Wikipedia since the content is presented as a matter of fact and is well supported with reliable references - and is not at all intended to be promotional any more than the numerous articles for particular books (such as The Grand Design), particular videos (such as Cancer), particular films (such as Hawking), particular TV programs (such as Genius), particular music (such as Piano Sonata No. 10) or even a particular song (such as Happy Birthday) - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:24, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again for your note - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Out of Africa

In Cave in Israel, Scientists Find Jawbone Fossil From Oldest Modern Human Out of Africa. Apparently, they spent 5 years convincing their peers, and it was published recently. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 01:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thank you for the NYT ref - seems very interesting - and may be a worthy consideration for the "Early human expansions out of Africa" article - iac - Thanks again - and - Enjoy!:) Drbogdan (talk) 13:28, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, and it certainly deserves its own article: Misliya-1. Go for it! Rowan Forest (talk) 13:56, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: FWIW - seems the study may have been added to the "2018 in science" article when "first published in January 2018" - nonetheless - I've "updated the posting somewhat" - hope it's ok - please let me know if otherwise of course - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:47, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

A nice updated summary: "Humans did not stem from a single ancestral population in one region of Africa." Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 01:56, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Yes - very interesting read - Thank you for posting - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 11:28, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

References

Your Kubrick quotation

Your recent addition to 2001 has included a Kubrick quotation which I have added to the Development section in that article. Could you look at it with an eye toward copy edits. JohnWickTwo (talk) 14:46, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

@JohnWickTwo: Thank you for your comments - no problem whatsoever - your edit seems excellent imo - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:18, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Ian on that page also seems to like your edit. Recently, I have learned that you were involved in some Featured Photos for Wikipedia. I have been spending some contribution time thinking about if the film article for 2001 is nearing something close to a FA nomination and am wondering if you might read through the article and mention to me if there are any pressing issues needing attention prior to further enhancing the article. JohnWickTwo (talk) 12:18, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

@JohnWickTwo: Thank you for your comments - and appreciation - yes - I've had limited experience re "Featured Photos" - but none with "Featured Articles" - nonetheless - may help with this at some opportunity (very busy at the moment) - in any regard - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:12, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

A BARNSTAR for you

		The Original Barnstar
		This is for your valuable efforts for contributing to Wikipedia PATH SLOPU (Talk) 12:06, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@Path slopu: Thank you for the Barnstar award - it's *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Cheers! —PaleoNeonate – 15:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of The Glass Fortress (film) – Result => MERGE

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Glass Fortress (film) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Glass Fortress (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BOVINEBOY2008 22:24, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Bovineboy2008: Thank you for your comments - the following was posted on the relevant "Talk:The Glass Fortress (film)" and "Discussion" pages:

Copied from => "Talk:The Glass Fortress (film)":

-- Worthy Article to KEEP --

"The Glass Fortress (film)" article seems worthy to KEEP since the film is related to "We (novel)" (a classic russian novel), "We (1982 film)" (a classic german film), "La Jetée" (a classic french photomontage film) and to "12 Monkeys" (a very popular classic american film by "Terry Gilliam") - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:11, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

References

Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Early expansions of hominins out of Africa.

Hi there Drbogdan, nice to meet you again. I wanted to let you know that I removed from the lead of this article a small paragraph that you had added discussing migrations of modern humans out of Africa c. 194,000 years ago. I did this because this article focuses by design on pre-modern out-of-Africa migrations out of Africa. Yet I found the information of your paragraph to still be useful in delimiting when these earlier migrations end, so I re-added that 194,000 year figure higher up. I hope you understand and as always I'm happy to discuss. My very best, Nicolas Perrault (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Nicolas Perrault III: Thank you for your post - and comments - your edits seem *entirely* ok with me - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:05, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Great! Nicolas Perrault (talk) 18:16, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Mars lake

This subglacial lake is so interesting. I bet some of the hydrobot concepts for Europa will try to fly to this Mars lake, as the distance is much shorter and the surface environment is much more benign. Regarding its astrobiology potential, Mars has had several glaciations (much more than Earth) so this lake may only represent some aspects of the last one, limiting the prebiotic chemistry "menu" and the evolutionary time available. I wonder if it is in direct contact with the crust? That would boost the prebiotic chemistry menu and "may" supply some sort of energy. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 18:02, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thank you for your comments - yes - *entirely* agree - the news re the Martian lake is *very* interesting - we'll have to wait-and-see how this all develops with future studies, but it may provide a better way, than earlier, of discovering some prebiotic chemicals and related I would think - Thanks again for your comments - they're all appreciated - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:22, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

FYI: Supplementary material (PDF) Figure S3 shows the lake has a triangular shape. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 18:43, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Dark, isolated, high pressure, frigid and full of peroxide salts...I would not say it is a step closer to discovering Martians, but interesting nonetheless. Rowan Forest (talk) 02:51, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Quantum mechanics – problematic edit

Hi Drbogdan, apparently you accepted this edit. Can you please have a look at it? Alas, it was a very, very bad edit. See also User talk:Leonard Willkins. Cheers. - DVdm (talk) 08:11, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

@DVdm: Thank you for your comments - on a second closer look at the edits, you may be right about this - Thank you for letting me know - it's appreciated - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:18, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks and cheers! - DVdm (talk) 13:19, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

A BARNSTAR for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	This is for your great advice . Hopefully you remember me and this is my thanks. I found no other barnstar to reward your gesture of appreciation and this Special barnstar is for you. Cheers, Happy editing! I am Dr. Sroy... ARKA (talk) 06:40, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dr. Sroy: Thank you *very much* for the The Special Barnstar - it's *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 11:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Carbon dioxide

If you change the NFPA 704, please change the reference on "NFPA_ref="? It currently is in conflict with the source given. The reference given for the NFPA 704 is for refrigerated liquid, the one you mentioned is for compressed gas. The NPFA 704 for atmospheric pressure may be 1-0-0 per this city msds Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 20:24, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

@Jim1138: Thank you *very much* for your post - and comments - I added the relevant reference to the "Carbon dioxide" page - hope it's *entirely* ok - please let me now if otherwise of course - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. A quick check suggested there are many unsourced NPFA 704s about. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 20:59, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

References

File:Film2016-TheGlassFortress.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Film2016-TheGlassFortress.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:14, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

NASA - PAH DataBase

[Note: copy of post also at => https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Complainer#NASA_-_PAH_DataBase ]
@Complainer - Thanks again for *all* your help with this - it's *greatly* appreciated - enclosed, if interested, is a link to "List of interstellar and circumstellar molecules" as well as my related "{{Molecules detected in outer space}}" template - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 19:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Copied from => "Benzo(a)pyrene#Sources (version 13:19, 7 April 2018)":

In February 2014, NASA announced an upgraded database for tracking polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), including BaP, in the universe. More than 20% of the carbon in the universe may be associated with PAHs, possible starting materials for the formation of life. PAHs seem to have been forming "only a couple of billion years after the Big Bang", are widespread throughout the universe, and are associated with new stars and exoplanets.

References

As a chemist, I understand that the fact that 20% of the carbon in the universe is PAH is deeply fascinating. This does by no means justify the fact that you copied and pasted the same paragraph, sourced by a collection of IR spectra (which is WP:SYNTH at best) in every single chemical compound and tried to justify it by writing "including [insert name of chemical here]". This is the same as writing "more than 20% of mammals are infested by tapeworms, including [name of mammal]" on the page of every single mammal and linking it to a site with tapeworm gene sequencing. It is not a good source, it is speculative (you actually don't know whether any of the PAHs has actually been found in space, you are demanding the reader to get a competence in IR spectrometry and check) and most of all it is the kind of non-specifici ctrl-C clutter that turns an article into a random collection of interesting facts. I am fixing the mess, which is harrowing enough without being backtracked. Believe me, people can live without knowing until they read the main article. complainer 13:26, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@Complainer: Thank you for your comments - and for your efforts - yes - agreed - on a further consideration, you may be right about this - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Reviewer rights?

Hi Thanks for approving my changes at Greenhouse gas. I was surprised I couldn't post directly or approve my own tweaks. Do I need to ask for reviewer permission or something? How? Can you help with that? Probably there is something I could read rather than asking you to type. If you could provide a diff to that material, that would be plenty help! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@NewsAndEventsGuy: Thanks for your comments - and question - help in obtaining "reviewers rights" might be at the following => https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers - also => https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reviewing_pending_changes - also => https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/Pending_changes_reviewer - at least for starters (been awhile since I last did this and things might have changed since then) - hope this helps - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll check that out. May ask at that page too, I know many of the regulars. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

A BARNSTAR for you!

		The Space Barnstar
		For your tireless contributions and relevant details. Hadron137 (talk) 16:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

@Hadron137: Thank you *very much* for "The Space Barnstar" - it's *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:54, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Egyptian hieroglyphs

Hello Dr. Bogdan, There I have got to seek your help regarding Egyptian Hieroglyphs. Actually one of my friends, is willing to learn the ancient Egyptian language. Do you know anyone to help him with? In advance thanks, please see if anyone is interested to teach him but free of cost. You may contact him here: User talk:Gairik3002 Or email : gairik3002gmail.com Anyway thanks, User:Dr. Sroy as Gairik3002 (talk) 14:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@Dr. Sroy: Thank you for your comments - and request - not able to help you with this at the moment - may wish to ask editors associated with the "Egyptian hieroglyphs" article - in any case - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:20, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Dennis, thanks for your advice. Although please contact him, if you get anyone. Thanks again, Dr. Sroy(aka.ARKA) (talk) 14:39, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

A BARNSTAR for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your tireless contributions, quality, and civility. Thank you. Rowan Forest (talk) 13:37, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thank you *very much* for The Editor's Barnstar - the award is *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:06, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Medical news editing

[note: edited for possibly most helpful comments - and readability]
You and another person just plopped this news into the aspirin article without actually changing anything else. Jytdog (talk) 13:46, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@Jytdog: Please WP:NPA - AFAIK - news item re aspirin seems worthy, relevant and very well-cited with medically related WP:RSs - further, there seems to be a very wide interest in the international media => Google search => over 35M results - copy of the text/refs at issue is below:

Copied from the "main page diff (version: 09:34, 17 September 2018)":

In September 2018, medical researchers concluded, based on a 19,114 person study conducted for five years, that use of low-dose aspirin in older people may not be beneficial and, in some cases, may be harmful.

References

In any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Aspirin for healthy older people was already questionable, this just clarified things and clearly found more harm than good. It doesn't change the use of aspirin for older people who have a history of CV disease. Jytdog (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments - yes - seems my understanding and presentation of the issue is basically the same as your own - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again for your own comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:36, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

The "news" content added to the lead (argh) and the body lacked that distinction. It said "that use of low-dose aspirin in older people may not be beneficial". Not the same. Jytdog (talk) 15:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

FWIW - Please WP:AGF - Thank you for your opinions (ala WP:OWN?) - however - there may be more than one way of presenting this material - as before, seems we both agree with the content - my original edit seems to reflect your current concerns - another editor (not me) further changed my original edit - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Abiogenesis

May be of interest: New Study Identifies Possible Ancestors of RNA . Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 13:53, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thank you for the reference - yes - *very* interesting - and yes - seems worthy for the abiogenesis and related articles, I would think - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Another interesting review at [4]. Paper at [5]. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 23:03, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thank you *very much* for the links - the studies seem *very* interesting - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

References

AP News Source

Thank you for your extensive edits and efforts to keep the citations up to date, and I'm grateful for your work so far! I note your explanation to use the archived Excite page as opposed to the live AP News page is that the bottom half of the latter has been trimmed or gone. As you have suggested, I took a gander at both sites, and it appears to me that the text on both sites are virtually identical. For the purposes of avoiding further misunderstanding in the future, could I ask which is the relevant paragraph that is missing? Thanks in advance! —Madrenergic^talk 15:06, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

@Madrenergic: Thank you for your comments - seems to have been an error - on my part - on a closer look - your own Live AP News page is identical (in text) to my Archived Excite News page and seems *entirely* OK after all - but different (last half of the original relevant text seems missing on my computer) from the Current Live Excite page - I'm in the process at the moment of restoring your updated Live AP News version which seems better than my Archived Excite News version - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:04, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing the air! Interestingly, the Current Live Excite page does appears to be missing the later half of its text to me as well, just as you described. A true mystery, but at least now we know that your computer is working fine. Nonetheless, I appreciate this discussion, and once again, thank you for your tireless work in your field! —Madrenergic^talk 16:38, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

PAHs produced at low-temperature

Check this out: “A Prebiotic Earth” – Missing Link Found on Saturn’s Moon Titan. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 03:27, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thank you for the suggested refs - the refs seem *very interesting* - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:39, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Fermi Paradox

Why haven't the aliens visited our solar system yet? They saw the reviews. Only one star. Rowan Forest (talk) 13:45, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thanks for the comment - and chuckle - good one - might even be true (our solar system is simply not interesting enough?) - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:57, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Oumuamua

Wouldn't the tumbling of a solar sail negate propulsion from solar pressure? Are mass and density estimates of the object compatible with a thin solar sail hypothesis? Spectroscopy suggests composition of a D-type asteroid (dense minerals). The excessive acceleration is real, but volatiles (even if not observed) are a more probable cause than a unicorn solar sail. Yes, rebuttals are bound to be published soon. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 14:02, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: I agree with your comments - and concerns - seems we may have to wait this out (re: In November 2018, astronomers from Harvard University suggested that the interstellar object 'Oumuamua may be an extraterrestrial solar sail from an alien civilization, in an effort to help explain the object's "peculiar acceleration".) to see what others in the field present - also agree - we may not have to wait long for this I would think atm - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

References

A BARNSTAR for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your quick work on Lulu and Nana. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 10:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

@Dreamy Jazz: Thank you *very much* for the Barnstar award - it's *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:19, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Closing a requested move

Please read Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions. Unfortunately, you can't close the debate at Talk:He Jiankui per point 1. Please wait for the seven days, or request an IAR snow close at WP:AN. HTH --RexxS (talk) 23:40, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

@RexxS: Thank you *very much* for your comments - and clarification - they're *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 23:44, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. And thank you for all your efforts to improve the content in such a difficult area. I'll keep an eye on the article and talk for a few weeks at least, to try to ensure that our policies and guidelines are adhered to. I'm always available if there's anything you feel I can help with. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 23:52, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Ceres

Check this out: Ceres (dwarf planet)#Carbon. Carbon present: 20% carbon by mass in its near surface. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 20:25, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Excellent addition to the article - very, very interesting finding of course - seems the "starting materials" for life may be more common in the universe than some may have thought - Thanks for sharing - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 20:49, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

It looks like planetary migration is the rule and not the exception, so regardless of rocky accretion conditions, current conditions at the surface are critical for organics to form and change. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 22:32, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

One can suspect a swarm or two of those Sedna-like bodies rich in water and 20% organics by mass, hit the early Earth. Abiogenesis oven. Mother Earth. Rowan Forest (talk) 23:34, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: IF Interested - another possibly worthy related reference was just published - at least one quote from the ref (ie, "[The presence of carbon] [- and related organic compounds?] on Ceres is evidence that the basic ingredients for life – including carbon – can be found in many different places, not only in our solar system but throughout the universe.") - seems particularly interesting to me due to my published NYT 2012 comment (ie, "02. The Starting Materials Related To Reproducible Chemicals Seem To Be *Everywhere* In The Universe.") - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:40, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree. There is no doubt now of the natural synthesis and vast occurrence of organic compounds in outer space. Wickramasinghe is 100% credited with the hypothesis and confirmation, although nobody believes these gigantic organic clouds are bacterial colonies. I reckon that although some star systems (solar systems) may have different carbon abundancies, at the galaxy level they must be similar in overall content. But the presence of organics (CHONPS) in the frigid deep space is not enough; abiogenesis has to happen in an environment conducive to reactions to occur, such as delivery to a nice humid and warm oven called Earth. Since water and CHONPS elements are abundant and ubiquitous, I reckon that sooner or later they are present at the right time in planetary accretion and cooling to begin abiogenesis in other worlds. There may be few such nursery planets per galaxy, but nothing would prevent other warm and humid planets from also receiving the same kind of organic building blocks that Earth did. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 18:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@Rowan Forest: Thank you for your comments - well-stated imo - yes - agree - seems the related hypothesis, presented in the 1970s by Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, is somewhat settled thinking afaik - although some possible derivative notions may be less so atm - iac - Thanks again for your *Excellent* comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:54, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

References

Ammonia

I added this section to the talk page of "Ammonia" regarding the "Synthesis and production" section: "Talk:Ammonia#Revising the "synthesis and production" section Suggestion." Bfoshizzle1 (talk) 01:06, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

@Bfoshizzle1: Thank you *very much* for your comments - and posting on the talk-page for a discussion of the suggested edits with other editors - seems the better road for such a considerable edit effort re the "Ammonia" article, I would think atm - Thanks again - and Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK Award for Lubang Jeriji Saléh

On 17 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lubang Jeriji Saléh, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lubang Jeriji Saléh cave contains what is believed to be the world's oldest figurative art (pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lubang Jeriji Saléh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lubang Jeriji Saléh), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde93 00:01, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Thank you *very much* for the DYK Award - it's *greatly* appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

2014 FE72 - Semi-major axis.

The semi-major axis you added contradicts the article for the object, so I'm reverting to the one in the article unless a source can be cited. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 18:03, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@Дрейгорич: Thank you for your comments - and correction - original value was taken from the {{TNO-distance}} template table - corrected the table value - please see => HERE - if possible, please check this - to be sure - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:26, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Semimajor axis is consistent with JPL now. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 18:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Earliest known flower - Nanjinganthus

You added "In 2018, scientists reported that the earliest flowers began about 180 million years ago, 50 million years earlier than thought earlier." to flowering plant. I looked at the reference, and recognised the material therein as something I has seen before. Following up on Google I found that an earlier version of the corresponding paper had been uploaded to bioArxiv in 2017. Should that date be used in Wikipedia? Lavateraguy (talk) 08:36, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

@Lavateraguy: Thank you for your comments - and question regarding the recently reported news about Nanjinganthus, the earliest known flower - good find (and great question) imo re the earlier reference - however - my thinking at the moment - is to present the recent 2018 EurekAlert! report - this may be a more official (and settled?) news report reference (coming from the American Association for the Advancement of Science) - but, if you like, this may be worthy of a further discussion with other editors, I would think - perhaps on the Talk:Flowering plant and/or Talk:Evolutionary history of plants pages? - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:51, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

References

A BARNSTAR for you!

	The Photographer's Barnstar
	Holiday/New Year greetings DB and a special thanks for your truly exceptional work on images and formatting. Special thanks on behalf of readers everywhere for keeping the space articles updated with latest from outer space! Thank you. Fotaun (talk) 13:40, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

@Fotaun: Thank you *very much* for "The Photographer's Barnstar" award, related comments and holiday greetings - they're all *greatly* appreciated - Happy Holidays! to you as well - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:54, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you and great job editing!! Fotaun (talk) 13:56, 22 December 2018 (UTC)