User talk:Kkmurray/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Kkmurray. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Start up and small business services

I have taken the content off and will be re-adding more suitable content in accordance to the title.

Lassany (talk) 01:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Consider branching off from Small business. Also see WikiProject Business and Economics --Kkmurray (talk) 02:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

external links as spam?

Hello Dr. Murray,

On Feb. 28, I added some external links to laboratory protocols to relevant wikipedia articles (e.g., a link to "In vivo isotopic labeling for quantitative proteomics" in the article on Quantitative Proteomics). You removed it as spam. As these are full-text, open access, and published in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, I am confused by your objection. Would you kindly explain your position to me? I'm new to wikipedia and seek to have a better understanding of how it all works. Thanks, Alboyle (talk) 14:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I object mainly on WP:LINKSTOAVOID criterion 1 and WP:NOT#REPOSITORY. The link may be appropriate (and more helpful) as a reference that is cited in the article body. --Kkmurray (talk) 15:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Acr cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Acr cover.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:51, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Added Non-free use rationale. --Kkmurray (talk) 23:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Annual Reports Section B cover.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Annual Reports Section B cover.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Annual Reports Section C cover.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Annual Reports Section C cover.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Applied Spectroscopy Reviews cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Applied Spectroscopy Reviews cover.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 06:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

London Children's Ballet

Hi KK,

I found the page on the LCB while doing new page patrol. A google search showed me a variety of sources, so I figured it was OK to keep it. After doing a bit of TLC on the page, I decided to leave a note on the originator's talk page, and found that you had put up a speedy tag earlier. I don't think this page warrants a speedy deletion, even though it was created by someone with a CoI regarding the article. If you like, you can still put it up for a deletion debate; I didn't want to tread on any toes here (ta-dum tish!). --Slashme (talk) 12:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Another note: I don't see the speedy tag anywhere in the page history. Was the page deleted and then re-created? If so, the author is frightfully naughty, and deserves some re-education. --Slashme (talk) 12:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

It looks like the page was deleted and then recreated with the copyright material removed.[1] It looks OK now. Thanks for the heads up. --Kkmurray (talk) 13:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, all good then! --Slashme (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Elba Rosa Rodríguez Fuentes notability

Suggested reasons for notability in subject discussion page.Pr4ever (talk) 05:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. Willdo.Pr4ever (talk) 18:27, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Here are the guidelines for reference: WP:POLITICIAN and WP:GNG. --Kkmurray (talk) 18:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Coherent anti-Stokes Raman spectroscopy

Hi, you made a request for this article to have a diagram (using {{reqdiagram}}). It now has an energy diagram. Is that what you had in mind? If not, would you mind describing what you think is required on the article's talk page? It is hard to fulfil diagram requests with few specifics. thanks --pfctdayelise (talk) 10:01, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I had in mind. Thanks! --Kkmurray (talk) 03:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Alexander State Forest

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Alexander State Forest, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.stateparks.com/alexander.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and 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 and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that the bot was correct, but I changed the one sentence in the stub page just the same.--Kkmurray (talk) 22:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Warning

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. --LAA Fan 01:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a specific example? The Alexander State Forest cite above was single sentence (paraphrase + cite) that has been since modified to avoid even a rigidly interpreted copyright definition. The Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge pages use non-copyright information from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. If there is some other copyright issue that I have missed, let me know. Thanks. --Kkmurray (talk) 02:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The Mean Kitty Song

Why the heck did you nominate it for db-bio, it is about a music video. Also, the article has a reliable source that has coverage of the music video. Schuym1 (talk) 02:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the speedy deletion tag to the article in question. A7 was inappropriate. Derivative works are not covered. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 03:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The article did not indicate why its subject (Cory Williams, Sparta the Mean Kitty, or the music video) is important or significant and for that reason I thought that CSD A7 applied. Anyway, thanks for redirecting. --Kkmurray (talk) 04:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Claremont McKenna College

Can you please re-revert the edits I made on the Claremont McKenna page's list of notable alumni and faculty? I am in the process of writing their Wiki pages. Also, why must they be deleted? Chuckwalla1022 (talk) 20:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be a lack of consensus regarding the large number of red link notable people that you are adding. I suggest that you first create the pages for the notable people and then create the links in the Claremont McKenna. And again, please use the article talk page for discussion before reverting other users edits. --Kkmurray (talk) 21:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Electrochem Pages

Do you plan to improve any of the articles you are tagging? Constructive criticism on the talk pages would be a whole lot more helpful than throwing up banners. Or you might want to look at Wikipedia:SOFIXIT. The fact that you tagged 34 pages in less than half an hour suggests you aren't reading these pages. It is good practice to read pages before editing them.--OMCV (talk) 02:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I am reading the pages; most are quite short and many need references. I am fixing things that can be done quickly when I can (e.g. external links, refs that can be easily found). I was making a pass through the electrochemistry articles after having made a similar pass through the chromatography articles. My overall goal is to clean up the set of analytical chemistry articles, particularly those related to instrumentation. But you are correct that I have a sufficient number of articles tagged for improvement. I will at this point concentrate that slower process. Thanks. --Kkmurray (talk) 02:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I actually agree with most of your tags. If you fix up even a few of those pages I won't question your methods, even if they aren't my own. I'm sorry for interrupting you. If you have time to work on an article I would recommend Coulometry I've taken a couple passes at it but it still includes a lot of bad information.--OMCV (talk) 03:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me to keep a good balance between tagging and fixing. It is good to get feedback and advice. I will double back on my trail and make a point to fix the problems I've tagged. --Kkmurray (talk) 03:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

External Links as SPAM

Hi there,

On Oct 8th, I added an external link to the 'semiconductor industry' topic. You removed this, tagging it as a commercial site. The link pointed to a calendar of industry related conferences and events refer to is content rich, free to use, open access, and does not promote any specific supplier or vendors. I believe that is a genuinely useful resource for people looking to attend events. I am confused by your objection. I was under the impression that the 'extrnal links' section is for other sites that are deemed to be useful. I checked through the 'what should be linked' and 'links to be considered' section of the 'External link' topic and feel that it complies with the guidelines. Would you mind kindly explaining your reasons and clarifying things for me? Thanks, Themintyman (talk) 10:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the links in semiconductor industry (Semiconductor Forum for VLSI Enthusiasts and Semiconductor industry event and conference calendar): The first link falls under WP:LINKSTOAVOID #10, "one should avoid...chat or discussion forums/groups." The second link falls under WP:EL#ADV and WP:LINKSTOAVOID #5 "Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising." since it is both ad laden and sells ad space. The second link also fails under WP:NOTDIRECTORY #3. Both fall under WP:LINKFARM in general and both were in multiple articles, falling under WP:LINKSPAM . --Kkmurray (talk) 13:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to reply. The only link I am concerned about is the 2nd link you discuss - the first has nothing to do with me. I am relatively new to contributing to Wikipedia so I apologize if I have not kept 100% within strict guidelines. However, I do feel that the site does NOT PRIMARILY exist to sell products or services. I admit it does offer services, but that it not the primary purpose of the site. It's main purpose it to act as a free to use resource. I would also argue that it does not have an 'objectionable' amount of advertising as it displays only one advert per page. One of the links you did not remove from the 'semiconductor' topic is Howstuffworks' semiconductor page. This page has no less than 12 adverts on it's landing page. I don't understand what makes this link ok but not the one I suggested in the 'semiconductor industry' topic? I presume it displays adverts to raise money to pay people to generate content. This site is no different. Regarding my suggestion falling under WP:NOTDIRECTORY #3, the example given in #3 states "mention of major events....may be acceptable". The link I suggested clearly pointed to a resource providing details of major events pertaining to the semiconductor industry. While I admit the suggested site contains a directory of semiconductor companies, the specific page suggested only lists events. Lastly, WP:LINKSPAM describes spamming as "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website". I do not see how the suggested link specifically promotes itself and find it difficult to see that two suggestions to the same site amounts to spamming. I guess we have different viewpoints on whether it falls within the guidelines or not as I do believe it is a link worth being shared with others interested in the topic. I am not sure about how to resolve a disagreement where it is simply one opinion vs another. May I suggest obtaining an impartial 3rd part opinion on this to resolve the issue? Regards, Themintyman (talk) 21:33, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree about getting additional input. To that end, I posted to Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#External_links_to_semi-directory.com). --Kkmurray (talk) 02:33, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for posting for help. I hope you don't mind me adding my own comments there. Having never been in this situation before, what happens now? Regards, Themintyman (talk) 20:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Kkmurray, I have still not heard anything further regarding this issue we have unresolved. It appears from the post that you created on the WikiProject Spam has went unanswered. Can you suggest what we do now? Thanks, Themintyman (talk) 13:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I moved it over to Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests.[2] We can see if the response is any better over there. --Kkmurray (talk) 19:13, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

external links

Dear Sir,

It's a pity that lists of links to manufacturers, suppliers or customers are forbidden in Wikipedia. Some of them contain some useful technical information (see http://www.bio-logic.info/potentiostat/notes.html or http://www.ecochemie.nl/?pag=5 for example) and it is easy to find counter-example in Wikipedia. Nevertheless I accept this, but I don't understand why lists of manufacturers are forbidden. Such lists can be helpful for the readers.

Enseeg (talk) 09:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC) Enseeg Nov. 26 2008

The technical information should be incorporated into the article (see WP:LINKSTOAVOID #1). Internal links to manufacturers can be useful (e.g. Agilent Technologies); external links should in general be submitted to the Open Directory Project, which can be linked from the article. --Kkmurray (talk) 14:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

FPLC

Hello! Thank you for your input in FPLC article.The figure that I have uploaded is based on a FPLC manual and I drew and wrote everything on there by myself, but I relied the information on the manual so I thought I needed the permission. But it seems like sine I have recreated, as long as I link the sources, I think I am fine. Let me know if I am wrong. Thank you so much!

Mi Ran Shin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Milly1211 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Even if it is your own work, you still need to assign a copyright to the image. See WP:ICTIC. You can choose from a number of possible licenses, but you must pick one and add the tag to your images. --Kkmurray (talk) 04:03, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

EC-MS

Can you take a look at the page I just created, Electron–capture mass spectrometry? Thank you for being an active chemistry author and editor. -Shootbamboo (talk) 01:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

It's a good stub. I made some changes and added some refs. Then next step would be to add some examples. --Kkmurray (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Beautiful, thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

No content in Category:Non-article Louisiana pages

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Non-article Louisiana pages, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Non-article Louisiana pages has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Non-article Louisiana pages, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 03:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Dart ion source

Hello Kkmurray, thanks for your support and for posting all the information for beginners, it is very helpful. I was wondering what is the proper way of citing internet articles, e.g. from CBC News?

Anzhela016 (talk) 03:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You probably want Template:Citenews or Template:Cite web. The Reference Generator tool has a fill out form for these templates. --Kkmurray (talk) 03:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

A centralised discussion which may interest you

Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Trek73

An article that you have been involved in editing, Trek73, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trek73. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Alastairward (talk) 19:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I commented in this and other AfDs that I think there should be a merge of the text based Star Trek games up for deletion (Trek73, Star Trek (text game), Begin (computer game), Begin 2, Super Star Trek, Netrek) and Apple Trek and Star Trek (script game) into a revised Star Trek (text game) to parallel Star Trek (role-playing game). Taken together, I think that this set of text-based games has notability. --Kkmurray (talk) 20:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Trek73

An article that you have been involved in editing, Trek73, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trek73 (2nd nomination). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Alastairward (talk) 21:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Orbitrap

Hello. I'm new to editing on Wikipedia. I found that the link to Kingdon trap redirected to Orbitrap which are different. So I changed the Kingdon trap article to include the specific information about the Kingdon trap included in the article and removed it form the Orbitrap article and left a link to the Orbitrap article. You reverted the changes. I believe that having a separate article for the Kingdon Trap is appropriate and I understand that removing information from the Orbitrap article was not helpful so I would like to ask your advice on how I should proceed. KingCuongL (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest that you build the Kingdon article but leave the Orbitrap article largely intact until the Kingdon article is more developed. --Kkmurray (talk) 11:59, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Pittcon Logo

Dr. Murray,

Are you able to change the file name Pittcon.jpeg to The Pittsburgh Conference Logo? We're looking to upload the Pittcon 2011 image, and do not want anyone to get confused by the different logos.

Thank you,

Pmcdonald1466 (talk) 13:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

You can upload the new file to File:Pittcon.jpg on top of the old file. If it gets unlinked from the article, it will be deleted under Speedy_Delete#Files F5 anyway. --Kkmurray (talk) 15:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pittcon.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pittcon.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

MRM

I added the link again with a peer reviewed source stating the same thing. Or do you believe that the statement is factually incorrect? Greetings --hroest 09:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Response here. --Kkmurray (talk) 19:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Baton Rouge seal.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Baton Rouge seal.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).