User talk:Nolimits5017

Welcome!

Hello, Nolimits5017, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Maria Alzate, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard. Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Pink Bull 16:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Thom Mason

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Thom Mason requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Scjessey (talk) 18:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Thom Mason

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Thom Mason, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.ornl.gov/ornlhome/leadership/mason_bio.shtml and http://www.sns.gov/~q1v/. As a copyright violation, Thom Mason appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Thom Mason has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Thom Mason and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Thom Mason with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Thom Mason.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issues

I do not doubt that Dr. Mason is notable enough for an article, and as reviewing administrator I was about to decline the speedy deletion nomination, but I noticed that the material was copied from the two websites listed above. Copyright is a very serious issue for Wikipedia, and we need to be certain that material copied from elsewhere is available under our terms of use. Assertion of permission to use is not enough.

I know that some material published by the US Federal Government is automatically in the public domain. If you can assure me that the two websites you have copied from are of the type described in Wikipedia:Copyrights#Works by the United States Federal Government, I will restore the article. Otherwise, you will need to follow the steps outlined in Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials if you own the copyright, or Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission if someone else does.

Alternatively, you could rewrite the material in your own words. It needs some rewriting anyway to make an encyclopedia article: for instance, it starts "Dr. Mason, who became Laboratory Director July 1, 2007... " leaving the reader wondering "What laboratory?" and having to look around for the infobox to find out. There is good general advice on article writing at WP:Your first article and WP:Writing better articles.

You can reply below here: I will watch this page. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Issues Response

John, I work for the government and the cites that I took the information off of were government controlled cites and all of the information is open to the public. I was planning on spending more time and actually creating an original work for wikipedia, but was discouraged by the speedy deletion. The information is in the public domain and does comply wiht the copyrights guidelines of wikipedia as posted in your comment above. If the article is restored I will continue developing a page that is more original and helpful to users

I have restored the article, but have also posted at our "Copyright issues" page to get expert confirmation that the source pages are indeed PD. If you hear nothing, assume all is well. JohnCD (talk) 19:05, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm afraid I've had to blank the article for now as the disclaimer on the website itself does not indicate that the content is public domain. Please see [1], and specifically note that it is permitted for non-commercial purposes only, which we are not permitted to accept. If you can verify permission (see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission) or if you can have someone affiliated with the website write to us to confirm that the content is in public domain in spite of their disclaimer, then we can certainly retain the content. Otherwise, I'm afraid, the article will have to be rewritten from scratch in this temporary page. If you have questions about this, please feel free to drop by my talk page. I'm watching the article, too, but things are a bit busy at the moment and I would not wish to overlook your question. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:19, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nevada National Security Site

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Nevada National Security Site, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Nevada Test Site. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

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. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:24, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In future please use Special:MovePage/PageTitle to rename pages, see WP:How to rename a page. Cheers, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 15:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you help me with that. I read the link you posted originally, but my page did not have the ability to move a page. I just now got the ability? Did you do that? Why would it not have been there before, and I am 100% sure it was not, as I looked carefully. Nolimits5017 (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The right which enables you to move pages is called "autoconfirmed". It is automatically granted after the account has been active 4 days and made ten edits. You should have got this right a while ago. The reason you couldn't move that particular page was because it was protected against moves by an user other than an administrator - so I had to do the move for you. You're unlikely to come across this problem often, so in general just use the "move" tab at the top of the page. However, if it is move-protected, you can ask an administrator to complete the move for you. Best, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carbon-26 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Carbon-26. Since you had some involvement with the Carbon-26 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Lanthanum-138 (talk) 05:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...

[2] Lanthanum-138 (talk) 02:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Boiling Water Reactor Safety Systems

The article Boiling Water Reactor Safety Systems has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

essay / original research

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:26, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article was created in an effort to improve on the Boiling Water Reactor article. The BWR was too long according to admins and I took the information directly off of that page and created its own page as it can be an issolated topic. No more research is needed as those cited are very comprehensive. I believe the original writer actually worked for the US NRC based on some of his statements. This is a good article and you would be losing alot of good information by deleting this! Nolimits5017 (talk) 13:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, it looks like it's unlikely it'll be deleted. Personally, I found it a very interesting read! Thank you for writing it. There are some parts which might need to be edited a bit in order to get the usual 'tone' we have in articles, and we really like inline citations on pretty much every paragraph, which an expert might find a bit excessive and not usually put there, but overall I really like it.

BTW, sorry for all the people only talking to you in templates: I find real messages and having a proper conversation to be much nicer. Cheers, henrik•talk 17:37, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much henrik. I do not mind, as long as I see the comments. As far as the citations go, I dont know how to put them in as everything is technical knowledge and all really came from the few citations at the end of the page. If one wanted, they could add the citations to every sentence, which would hinder the user in my opinion. Nolimits5017 (talk) 17:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, with the risk of boring you with a long explanation.. :) It's a bit tricky to explain, but it has to do with the fact that we don't make any efforts to verify who editors are. Remember that anyone can come along and edit the article at any time, and we really have no idea whether that person is an expert or not. Thus we also need to enable other non-experts to verify that someone wrote is accurate, which can be hard to do unless the citation is very specific (Especially over time, as material tends to move around quite a bit - things can be copied between articles)

So that's the reason why inline cites are popular here: they make it much easier to track down which parts of the article are supported by which sources. But I can agree that it's a bit excessive at times, and can break the flow of reading. I personally typically have roughly one citation per paragraph, with perhaps a few additional ones for direct quotes or anything likely to be surprising or controversial. henrik•talk 18:20, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the explanation and I do agree. I will consult my material and see what other citations I can essentially shove in there. When ever I have some extra time at work I will edit to make sure that there are inline citations. Best Wishes. Nolimits5017 (talk) 18:47, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Douchebag

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the Douchebag page. Such edits are considered vandalism and quickly undone. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 17:03, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]