User talk:Walter Tau
License tagging for Image:Talica.gif
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Talica.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Helpme
[edit]Which kind of help do you want?--Thw1309 (talk) 18:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: DIPSO (March 15)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:DIPSO and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Hello! Walter Tau,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! (t) Josve05a (c) 09:52, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
|
Your draft article, Draft:DIPSO
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "DIPSO".
In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}
or {{db-g13}}
code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 22:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Reference errors on 15 February
[edit]Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Lithium–air battery page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Edit summary
[edit]Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
I noticed your recent edit to Inventive step and non-obviousness does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! --Edcolins (talk) 16:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.
[edit]Hello Walter Tau,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp. for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, 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) 13:46, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
July 2016
[edit]Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Inventive step and non-obviousness. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 03:46, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Blokhin’s Oncology Scientific Center of Russia (February 18)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Blokhin’s Oncology Scientific Center of Russia and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) (March 11)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476 U.S. 227 (1986) has been accepted
[edit]The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
- If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
SwisterTwister talk 17:58, 31 March 2017 (UTC)Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Blokhin’s Oncology Scientific Center of Russia, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The article Vlad Sokolovskiy has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Natureium (talk) 14:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: 17track.net (October 1)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:17track.net and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:17track.net, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Your submission at Articles for creation: 17track.net (October 5)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:17track.net and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:17track.net, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
- You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:17track.net
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "17track.net".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}
, {{db-draft}}
, or {{db-g13}}
code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dolotta (talk) 04:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit]Disambiguation link notification for August 14
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Embassy of Tanzania, Moscow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marocco. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit]Disambiguation link notification for February 16
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Cost of Knowledge, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Glossa and Lingua.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:43, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 24
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mordvinic languages, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Finnish, Mari and Estonian.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 30
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Lens, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ris.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
Careful with ref names
[edit]Hi! Your edit here introduced a duplicate ref name error. (Search for 'cite error:' in the versions before and after your edit.) I have since fixed this error. --Palosirkka (talk) 12:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit]December 2021
[edit]Hi Walter Tau! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Sci-Hub that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 17:55, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 3
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Teletransportation paradox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Classical.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Sci-Hub refs
[edit]Hi Walter, A polite request not to use sci-hub.41610.org
or sci-hub-links.com
as references, as you did at Sci-Hub. They are spam/phishing websites that have in the past led to fake versions of Sci-Hub. Cheers, k. — kashmīrī TALK 16:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
__ Thank you for letting me know. Do you have addition infor about fake sci-hub sites? I would like to add a paragraph about it to Wiki.
- A Middle Eastern editor has been persistently pushing those spam links to en-wiki and others, as we kept blocking them and their socks. — kashmīrī TALK 17:25, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 11
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sci-Hub, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DOI.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
[edit]Hi Walter Tau, I just undid you edit to 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine because it wasn't formatted in a way that is normal for Wikipedia (for example it didn't use internal links) and it wasn't placed in a logical section of the article.
With an article as important as this it's critical that we are all careful. I advice you use the preview button to see your changes before they go live and discuss any large or controversial changes (which this looks like it might be) on the articles talk page. Thanks, Cakelot1 (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Singing posts
[edit]This [[1]] moved my signature and assigned it to a post I did not make. This is very much against the rules (and could be seen as violating wp:npa), but I assume it was a mistake. Do not insert comments into another user's posts, even as replies. Also please read wp:sign and wp:indent. Slatersteven (talk) 12:40, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
May 2022
[edit] Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Scholarly peer review into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 15:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- thank you for letting me know. My intention was NOT to copy, but to move from one article to another. I assumed, that wiki automatically keeps track of such moves. I will make sure, I write "history of attribution" in more details. Walter Tau (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- No problem, I did the same thing when I was new. Doug Weller talk 18:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 23
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diamond open access, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DOI.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 30
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sci-Hub, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Deal.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 2
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ScienceOpen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DOI.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
License tagging for File:Libraries-Pictures-H1.png
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Libraries-Pictures-H1.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help. This is the first time I am uploading an image, and I am not familiar with the process. I made with plot myself, and I do not claim copyright. Did I place it correctly now? Walter Tau (talk) 21:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 17
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ScienceOpen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page F1000.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 31
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Research in lithium-ion batteries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Energy efficiency.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 17
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Polarography, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mercury and Working.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Help me!
[edit]This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Please help me with... Hello. This is the first time I am posting a good figure. This is Fig.2 (counts vs year). on page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_battery The source files is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ByYear-2022-12-12.png . I would like to have this figure to be larger on the webpage. Also, there is a bug, that prevents the correct figure title "The number of publication related to electrochemical powersources by year. Also shown as the magenta line is the inflation-adjusted oil price in US$/liter in log scale." from being displayed. What is shown on webpage is: The number of publication related toelectrochemical powersource by year. Also shown as the magenta line is the inflation-adjusted oil price in US$/liter in log scale. Walter Tau (talk) 22:46, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've adjusted that for you. For the record, if you are using the Visual Editor, the size settings are in 'Advanced'. If you are using the source editor, the size in pixels is placed after thumb (you can see it in my edit) - RichT|C|E-Mail 00:46, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your help. You were able to to place the correct caption too.
- Wou;d it be possible to place this figure at the end of Section "History" and make its width equal to the webpage width.
- This figure has a lot of fine details, and it is still too small for a view on the webpage directly. Walter Tau (talk) 01:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Done but can't *really* make it much bigger... phones exist :) - RichT|C|E-Mail 03:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
>> Thank you for your help. Hopefully, this size and location in the article will help the readers to understand the technology history better.
Help me!
[edit]This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Please help me with... I added several new references to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sodium%E2%80%93sulfur_battery&action=edit§ion=2 , and I believe, that they in a correct format, but what I see on the webpage itself is:
{{cite journal}}
: Empty citation (help): Empty citation (help){{cite journal}}
: Empty citation (help): Empty citation (help){{cite journal}}
: Empty citation (help): Empty citation (help){{cite journal}}
: Empty citation (help): Empty citation (help){{cite journal}}
: Empty citation (help): Empty citation (help){{cite journal}}
: Empty citation (help): Empty citation (help){{cite journal}}
: Empty citation (help): Empty citation (help)
Can someone more experienced fix these references and tell me, where I screwed up, so that I can format reference correctl next time? Thank you in advance, WT. Walter Tau (talk) 22:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is with this edit: Special:Diff/1127136843. Here you added citations like this:
<ref>{{Cite journal|L. C. De Jonghe, L. Feldman and A. Beuchele, "Slow degradation and electron conduction in sodium/beta-aluminas." Journal of Materials Science, 16, 780 (1981) 10.1007/BF02402796;}}</ref>
, but that is not how {{Cite journal}} is used. With this template, you need to specify the different parameters individually, for example like this:<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=De Jonghe |first1=L. C. |last2=Feldman |first2=L. |title=Slow degradation and electron conduction in sodium/beta-aluminas |journal=Journal of Materials Science |volume=16 |page=780 |doi=10.1007/BF02402796}}</ref>
. Alternatively, you can just type in the citation between the <ref> tags, without any {{Cite journal}}. It is however recommended to use citation templates when editing an article that already uses them. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 22:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)- thank you very much for the explanation. I was unaware of the two different reference styles. I can fix the rest myself. 2601:19B:580:6270:A46B:4154:56ED:54C6 (talk) 23:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 11
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ket language, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Fusion, Incorporation and SOV.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 18
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Triboelectric effect, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page H+.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Help me!
[edit]This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Please help me with... I am trying to add a figure to a wikiarticle, but it comes out too big. I do not know how to resize it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarography Walter Tau (talk) 19:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed – you had a pair of brackets too much. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 19:40, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- thank you for your help. I learned something new today :) Walter Tau (talk) 19:43, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Help me!
[edit]This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Please help me with... I am asking for help with replacing on page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access Figure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/File:Percentange_of_Open_Access_journal_articles_available_from_ACS_(green),_Elsevier_(orange)_and_MDPI_(blue)_vs._the_original_publication_year_accrording_to_Web_Of_Science_on_on_2022-10-28.png
with its updated version:
o
Thank you in advance, Walter Tau. Walter Tau (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- If you edit the page, you should be able to just replace the current file name with the new file name. If you want more help, change the {{help me-helped}} back into a {{help me}}, stop by the Teahouse, or Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 09:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for ypour sugegstion. Unfortunately, I am do not see where I can "replace the current file name with the new file name". Does wiki have video instructions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter Tau (talk • contribs) 11:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- We have a picture tutorial, though it does not have any videos. You are looking to replace File:Percentange of Open Access journal articles available from ACS (green), Elsevier (orange) and MDPI (blue) vs. the original publication year accrording to Web Of Science on on 2022-10-28.png with File:OA-Plot.png, so all you need to do is edit the page, and replace the first image's filename with the second image's filename. Primefac (talk) 12:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- thank you for the reference to picture tutorial. Finally, I was able to do it ! Walter Tau (talk) 12:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 1
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Open access, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ACS.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
February 2023
[edit]Your edit to Backlog of unexamined patent applications has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 22:07, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note. I am aware of the reuse-of-copyrighted-material problem, therefore I ALWAYS rephrase the original text and provide a reference to it.
- The link you provided https://www.mayordrewdilkens.ca/biohttps://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?amp=&article=6343&context=faculty_scholarship does not work. Could you please provide the correct link?
- As my profile says, I am an anti-deletionist, which means, that I expect from myself and others to update/improve the wiki-text, rather than deleting it.
- Look forward to hearing back from you. Walter Tau (talk) 13:29, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- The correct url is https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?amp=&article=6343&context=faculty_scholarship. You can get an idea of the overlap by viewing the iThenticate report at CopyPatrol. Content on that report is on page 8 of the source document. While comparing the article with the source document I found some additional text beyond what the bot found. The paragraph beginning "Looking at a sample of 10,000 applications" is also copied from page 8 of the source document. Please don't add copyright material from other websites to Wikipedia. To do so is a violation of our copyright policy. Everything you contribute needs to be written in your own words please. — Diannaa (talk) 14:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed, I made references to the article by Frakes and Wasserman. I indicated , what phrases were cited. I've done similar citations in numerous other publications (journal articles), and I believe, that these specific quatations on the wiki-page strictly fall within the four corners of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use Doctrine. Limited use of copryrighted material is allowed in every country, that has an active IP regime.
- Since, this topic/article is of a significant interest to many wiki-readers, may I suggest, that we work on improving the deleted section?
- To start with, could you please provide me with the deleted text, that includes formatted references. (I do not think, I saved the formatted text on my comp.) I will check the source, you cited, and I will modify the text to make sure, that the difference between Frakes et al. and my new text goes well beyond the four corners of the Fair Use. Walter Tau (talk) 14:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. I can send you the deleted material via email if you like, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first. — Diannaa (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help. I have never heard of "ikipedia email", and I could not find what it is. Could you please direct me to the right resource?
- Also, is there is a threshold number (10%?) to pass the CopyPatrol test? Walter Tau (talk) 16:16, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- It should have read "Wikipedia email". Please see Wikipedia:Emailing users for more information on this topic. Regarding CopyPatrol, the bot checks each edit over a certain size and reports its findings. Checks are performed via donated credits from the iThenticate plagiarism detection service. Wikipedia's allowance for copyright violations is zero. Don't copy from your sources at all please. — Diannaa (talk) 20:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help. I activated my wiki-email. Please try sending me the deleted text. Then, we will know, if my wiki-mail works.
- Also, thank you for telling me about Copy Patrol. I will test my new text with it before posting. Walter Tau (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Email sent. — Diannaa (talk) 01:14, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- thank you for your help. Hopefully, I can re-write the text in the next few days. Walter Tau (talk) 12:18, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- Email sent. — Diannaa (talk) 01:14, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- It should have read "Wikipedia email". Please see Wikipedia:Emailing users for more information on this topic. Regarding CopyPatrol, the bot checks each edit over a certain size and reports its findings. Checks are performed via donated credits from the iThenticate plagiarism detection service. Wikipedia's allowance for copyright violations is zero. Don't copy from your sources at all please. — Diannaa (talk) 20:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. I can send you the deleted material via email if you like, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first. — Diannaa (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 9
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Salient (geography), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Petsamo.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 16
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Electrospray
- added a link pointing to John Fenn
- Unity of invention
- added a link pointing to EPO
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Superconcentrated electrolytes (February 20)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Superconcentrated electrolytes and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
AfC notification: Draft:Superconcentrated electrolytes has a new comment
[edit]Help me!
[edit]Primefac (talk) 19:10, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Help me!
[edit]This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Please help me with... Hello ! I am trying to add on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_infringement#United_States
a cross-reference to a wiki article: "B) reasonable royalty remedy is available in most patent infringement cases. Since 1971, this remedy is controlled by Federal Circuit precedent in [Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.]",' but the reference does not come out right. Could someone please fix the cross-reference, so that I can to do this type of formatting myself next time? Walter Tau (talk) 19:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- If it's a wikilink - a link to another article - you use double-square brackets but not a full URL. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 20:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- thank you. my real problem was not the [[ ]] but the _ in the original url. Looks like it is working now. Walter Tau (talk) 22:32, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
March 2023
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. I noticed that your recent edit to Fuel cell added a link to an image on an external website or on your computer, or to a file name that does not exist on Wikipedia's server. For technical and policy reasons it is not possible to use images from external sources on Wikipedia. Most images you find on the internet are copyrighted and cannot be used on Wikipedia, or their use is subject to certain restrictions. If the image meets Wikipedia's image use policy, consider uploading it to Wikipedia yourself or request that someone else upload it. See the image tutorial to learn about wiki syntax used for images. Thank you. - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 23:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note. Are you talking about this image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ByYear-2022-12-12.png ?
- If, yes, then
- the image came from a peer-reviewed journal article https://www.qeios.com/read/G6G4EA, which was published under under CC BY Open Access license, which means, that the image can be freely reused/copied/distributed provided, that the original source is acknowledged: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . I would be most grateful, if you can restore the figure.
- If not, please remind what image it was. Better yet, share it privately. I am puzzled now, which image you are referring to. Walter Tau (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp. moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp., is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 TT me 10:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Superconcentrated electrolytes has been accepted
[edit]Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:26, 2 April 2023 (UTC)Disambiguation link notification for April 7
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Finland–Russia relations, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Alexander I and Swedish.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 29
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Non-obviousness in United States patent law, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evans v. Eaton.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp. (May 1)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp. and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Disambiguation link notification for May 6
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ariosa v. Sequenom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CAFC.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:33, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
May 2023
[edit]Your edit to United States patent law has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 12:17, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi Walter Tau! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Patentable subject matter that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Your edit to Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 23:22, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- I provided all the references and MORE IMPORTANTLY I paraphrased the cited article. Under the US Law (and of other countries, that I am aware of) Copyright infringement does have Doctrine of Equivalence. As long as the text is not literally copied (or if the copied amount is nor substantial - Fair use) there is no copyright infringement. Please restore my edit. Walter Tau (talk) 23:28, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- You paraphrased it far too closely. This is the site copied from; here's the iThenticate report. 70% of the edit was the same as the source material, and that's across at least a paragraph's work of text. At the very very least, any significant amount of text (this refers to anything over like half a sentence's worth) needs to be in quotation marks, and even that should be.
- You copied in the entire paragraph starting at "Things didn’t end there, however", among other sentences which were closely paraphrased. You may also want to read Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Fair use only applies on Wikipedia when there is no freely-licensed alternative available – this was explained above by User:Diannaa. The freely-licensed alternative available here is just writing the text in your own words. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 23:36, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback. I would like to be able to check, if more paraphrasing is needed before I post something, but I am unable to access neither your iThenticate report link nor https://api.ithenticate.com/ website without a membership. Do they have another web portal for wiki-users? Walter Tau (talk) 00:12, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- I have sent you an email with a screenshot of the copypatrol report. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:00, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing the infor. I do not dispute using that article. Au contraire, I cited that article in my wiki edit. The real question is how much paraphrasing is enough. Is there a website, where I can test my paraphrasings before posting them on wiki? Walter Tau (talk) 01:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know of any sites that check before it's in an article, but they may exist. My advice is to generally just reword everything. If you have more than a couple words in a row identical to the source, it's probably too close. WP:FIXCLOSEPARA also has some useful information. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing that link. I do see "inadvertent close paraphrasing" to be the problem with my edit.
- I was asking earlier, if I can use CopyPatrol myself before I post my edits. It is one thing, if I am not paraphrasing enough a source, that I know. Another thing is, that I may accidentally write something similar to what posted on a website, that I do not know about. Walter Tau (talk) 09:57, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think I've ever seen anyone accidentally close paraphrase a website they don't know about, so that wouldn't be on my list of worries; if you somehow do, it's probably a sign close paraphrasing is impossible to avoid. As for using CopyPatrol before posting your edits, I don't think it has that feature, unfortunately. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 12:49, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know of any sites that check before it's in an article, but they may exist. My advice is to generally just reword everything. If you have more than a couple words in a row identical to the source, it's probably too close. WP:FIXCLOSEPARA also has some useful information. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback. I would like to be able to check, if more paraphrasing is needed before I post something, but I am unable to access neither your iThenticate report link nor https://api.ithenticate.com/ website without a membership. Do they have another web portal for wiki-users? Walter Tau (talk) 00:12, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
CS1 error on Term of patent in the United States
[edit]Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Term of patent in the United States, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 20:55, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 20
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Scopus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Degree.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 31
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CAFC.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Need for reliable sources
[edit]Please cite reliable sources when expanding articles. In the article "Chemical patent", you recently added the following statement:
- "the patent monopoly of pharmaceuticals in enforced by government (e.g. by FDA in the USA), while in most other markets, it is the patent owner, who needs to spend significant effort enforcing its patents"
but this statement does not appear to be supported by the source you provided (here). In my understanding, this is also incorrect. Thanks. Edcolins (talk) 19:53, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note. Indeed, that was not a good reference. I was referring to this Provision
- "Because the Act also makes clear that filing an ANDA with a paragraph IV certification is an act of patent infringement, the law actually promotes litigation between private parties; the innovator is prompted to commence patent enforcement litigation against the generic infringer, and the generic company is incentivized to file a countersuit to have the patents listed in the Orange Book declared invalid"
- of Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, which adds another hurdle (Uncle Sam) to attempted patent infringement in case of pharmaceuticals. Such hurdles do not exist for most other patents.
- Of course, this is an American prospective. You may be in a better position to describe, if European Medicines Agency or its national siblings have similar procedures.
- Let's work on improving this section combing my knowledge of the USA practice and yours of European. Walter Tau (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 7
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited United States patent law, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Enablement.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
[edit] Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Le Roy v. Tatham into Patentable subject matter. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:07, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for letting me know. I am still learning. I thought that this attribution
- =====1948 Le Roy v. Tatham=====
- was sufficient. I will provide more in the edit summarynext time. Walter Tau (talk) 17:55, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 18
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Unity of invention
- added links pointing to EPO and Safe harbor
- Sufficiency of disclosure
- added a link pointing to Enablement
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 25
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act
- Patent application
- added a link pointing to Enablement
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
Missing signature on talk page
[edit]Hello again, Walter Tau. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at Talk:Sufficiency of disclosure, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. --Edcolins (talk) 20:34, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
- thank you for letting me know. i learn something new every day. Walter Tau (talk) 02:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Edcolins (talk) 19:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Grillo-Werke (June 28)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Grillo-Werke and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
- Dear wiki-colleagues: you missed the most import note in my DRAFT: it is NOT an on original article, it is an accurate translation of the corresponding article in German-wiki. The fact, that you are raising issues, that were found to be non-existing by German editors (who are likely to have more expertice in this subject, than English editors), brings up the long-standing problem of DOUBLE STANDARDS in Wikipedia. I would like to take this opportunity to use this case for developing a uniform set of standards in Wikipedia. Shall we start the process with an Arbitration request or is there an alternative way? Walter Tau (talk) 13:23, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 2
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Patent claim, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EPO.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 18
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Patent law of China, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civil law.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 25
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Ariosa v. Sequenom
- added a link pointing to Mayo
- Unity of invention
- added a link pointing to PCT
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 1
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kramers–Kronig relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battery.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
August 2023
[edit]Your edit to Kramers–Kronig relations has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 00:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note. Which copyright material are you referring to? I wrote that whole section myself. Walter Tau (talk) 00:44, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- You copypasted the abstract of the article you cited into your citation. Please don't do that. — Diannaa (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- You and I had a similar confrontation a few months ago regarding another article. I always paraphrase the sources, that I cite. Do you use some automatic plagiarism checker? In this case, I can try my rewording myselft first to make sure, it passes the test. Could you please send me my edit in private, so that I can modify it further? Walter Tau (talk) 01:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- I think I understand , what the problem is. The Abstract (just like the Title) of an article can be reproduced without copyright restriction !!! The applicable UK law can be found here: https://libguides.swansea.ac.uk/copyright/researchers :
- Abstracts: copyright is normally applicable to published abstracts. However, it is permitted for scientific and technical abstracts to be copied under section 60 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
- Section 60. Abstracts of scientific or technical articles
- (1)Where an article on a scientific or technical subject is published in a periodical accompanied by an abstract indicating the contents of the article, it is not an infringement of copyright in the abstract, or in the article, to copy the abstract or issue copies of it to the public.
- (2)This section does not apply if or to the extent that there is a licensing scheme certified for the purposes of this section under section 143 providing for the grant of licences.
- In the USA, the publisher dedicates the Abstract and the other bibliographic infor to the public:
- "However, publishers of scientific articles invariably make abstracts freely available, even when the article itself is not." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_(summary)
- Abstract is a part of the index information, that goes into citation databases. One way of another, the publishers surrended the texts of the Abstracts into the Free Domain, when they agree to have their journal indexed in a database. You were 100 % wrong in your deletionism. Please restore my edit in full. Walter Tau (talk) 01:35, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- Because our servers are located in the United States, we follow US copyright law. In addition, Wikipedia has strict rules about additng non-free content. A reader can easily read the abstract by clicking on the link in the citation. There's no such thing as releasing content into the "free domain" simply by publishing it. In fact the opposite is true; publication generates copyright protection. If you wish to get a second opinion please consider asking someone on this list. — Diannaa (talk) 01:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- Did you check this link
- "However, publishers of scientific articles invariably make abstracts freely available, even when the article itself is not." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_(summary)
- before you wrote your last message? Walter Tau (talk) 01:47, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- "Freely available" is not the same thing as "in the public domain". I have to log off now; my editing day is over. — Diannaa (talk) 01:50, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- Because our servers are located in the United States, we follow US copyright law. In addition, Wikipedia has strict rules about additng non-free content. A reader can easily read the abstract by clicking on the link in the citation. There's no such thing as releasing content into the "free domain" simply by publishing it. In fact the opposite is true; publication generates copyright protection. If you wish to get a second opinion please consider asking someone on this list. — Diannaa (talk) 01:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- You and I had a similar confrontation a few months ago regarding another article. I always paraphrase the sources, that I cite. Do you use some automatic plagiarism checker? In this case, I can try my rewording myselft first to make sure, it passes the test. Could you please send me my edit in private, so that I can modify it further? Walter Tau (talk) 01:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
- You copypasted the abstract of the article you cited into your citation. Please don't do that. — Diannaa (talk) 01:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 8
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anabolic-androgenic steroids abuse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page White collar.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 18
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American Chemical Society, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cambia.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 14
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of the lithium-ion battery, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Asahi and Bell Laboratory.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 21
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nucleophile, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kinetic.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Walter. I saw that you were interested in Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp, which is somewhat related to fair pricing for patent licenses, so I was hoping you might take a look at the Essential patents page with me. I work for Qualcomm, who is a major developer of essential patents. Therefore, I disclosed a conflict of interest and planned not to make any kind of major expansion of the page (even though it needs it). However, the page is not in very good shape and I was hoping to help get it to a point where it at least has a basic, properly cited description of what essential patents are. I posted over here if you have a minute to take a look and join in. Lcfbrandon (talk) 22:47, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- sure. I wrote Georgia-Pacific article, because I am interested in patent jurispridence of SCOTUS and CAFC. That article has been declined as a stand-alone article, but it is a part of [[2]] for now. We shall move it to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_infringement_under_United_States_law .
- I am not an expert on FRAND, but here is an article, that you can improve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing . There is a famous blogger in the USA, who always writes about SEPs and FRAND licensing. I cannot find his name now. He uses a cartoon of his mug instead of a photograph...hopefully, you know who he is.
- Once again, I am not an expert on this topic, but I will help you to fight deletionsits, who will try to destroy your writing. And I suggest, that you start with improving https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing . It is impossible to start a new article on wiki these days, because of deletionists. It is better to expand an existing article, until someone suggests a split.... let me kniw, how I can help. Walter Tau (talk) 23:14, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- I just saw the post here: https://www.uspto.gov/subscription-center/2022/standard-essential-patent-policy-and-practices-we-want-hear-you#:~:text=Those%20patents%20%E2%80%94%20standard%20essential%20patents,society%20and%20across%20the%20globe. and another by .Patricia E Chandler. Please go ahead and make changes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_patent , and make wiki-cross-link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing .
- Let me, when you are done, so that I can do the next edit, which may protect that page from deletionists. Walter Tau (talk) 00:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 4
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Breyer.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 11
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lithium-ion battery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Electronic.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
TylerBurden (talk) 19:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 22
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sodium–sulfur battery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ford.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (second request)
[edit] Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Legal status of ayahuasca by country into Owen M. Panner. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- thank you for letting me know. How do I provide attribution to edit, that has been finalized? May I suggest, that you add this attribution yourself now, so that I see it on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Owen_M._Panner&action=edit§ion=4 ? Walter Tau (talk) 00:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- The attribution does not go into the body of the article. It's done via the edit summary, like I did here. If you forget to do it at the time you perform the edit, it's okay to add it in a subsequent edit summary. — Diannaa (talk) 19:29, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- thank you very for showing me. hopefully, I can do it correctly next time myself. 2601:19B:580:6270:850:2E36:9397:7649 (talk) 20:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- The attribution does not go into the body of the article. It's done via the edit summary, like I did here. If you forget to do it at the time you perform the edit, it's okay to add it in a subsequent edit summary. — Diannaa (talk) 19:29, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
I apologieze that my peer editor deleted your post without proper explanation. See my comment at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Modafinil#Opinions_of_notable_persons and you are welcome for a discussion there. --Maxim Masiutin (talk) 15:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 10
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ChemInform, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wiley.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
LSD
[edit]Please familiarize yourself with sourcing policies concerning biomedical articles, see WP:MEDRS. The links to www.testing.com and www.health-street.net that you added in this and this revisions are not reliable sources. Please review the sourcing and content policies, especially WP:SCHOLARSHIP and WP:RSSELF. --WikiLinuz (talk) 03:51, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- Also, see Template:Cite journal, Template:Cite book, and Template:Cite web, and avoid using raw texts inside <ref></ref> tags when adding sources. Please take a look at examples in the article wikisource on what parameters are required and how to use them for these templates. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LSD&diff=prev&oldid=1184714761 --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- THank you for your note about secondary sources. I will add better references later today.
- Regarding the Template: I use EndNote to automatically generate my lists of references. Clarivate- the owner of EndNote- agreed to release a new reference style for Wikipedia, but someone from Wikipedia Foundation needs to contact Clarivate with an official request. Clarivate rejected my personal request earlier this year.
- Do I understand correctly, that you manually edited my reference list? Please note, that you missed a lot of infor, such as volumes, issues and page numbers. Do you think, that wiki-readers would find my reference style with more infor better than yours? Do you think, that when the reference format is less than ideal, it would be better to have a complete bibliographic infor than to adhere to some format, which is not used anywhere else besides wiki and has a missing infor? Walter Tau (talk) 12:47, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Do I understand correctly, that you manually edited my reference list?
- YesPlease note, that you missed a lot of infor, such as volumes, issues and page numbers.
I know. I was just being lazy, and a reader can visit DOI to see all those info (it's mostly sufficient to fill in required parameters, not everything).Do you think, that wiki-readers would find my reference style with more infor better than yours?
Do you mean your style with more information? It's okay to fill in as much as needed, but it's mostly sufficient to fill in only required parameters, because some template parameters may be redundant. Readers interested in knowing more about the source would just visit the DOI or URL (if there's already DOI, we don't need URL because it's redundant, unless it links to a freely available PDF version that's hosted elsewhere for example). But it's recommended that we use templates and not fill in raw citations manually (because many internal tools and bots rely on template structure to parse and perform certain tasks).Do you think, that when the reference format is less than ideal, it would be better to have a complete bibliographic infor than to adhere to some format, which is not used anywhere else besides wiki and has a missing infor?
Citation types (WP:CITETYPE) should be consistent across the whole article; we can't mix citation styles. And sources should be cited as per MOS guidelines. For a detailed guideline, please consult Wikipedia:Citing sources. --WikiLinuz (talk) 06:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)- You can also reuse citation that you used previously using "name=" attribute, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LSD&diff=prev&oldid=1184886246 --WikiLinuz (talk) 06:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
>> Thank you for ypour reply. Did you know, that there are programs (such as EndNote, Mendeley and Zotero), that can auto-generate references in a user -defined format? I use the most expensive of the three (EndNote), but unfortunately, EndNote cannot split authors first name and last name into wiki style firstname= , lastname=. Still there are other options. You mentioned, that wiki can generate a complete reference from DOI. Do you where I can find this tool?
- Why don't you just manually type in the template parameters when editing Wikipedia? (Since EndNote's output isn't desirable anyway). It's just less troublesome. --WikiLinuz (talk) 08:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- FYI, this tool generates references for you, so that you don't have to rely on EndNode or other programs to generate refs on Wiki format. https://citation-template-filling.toolforge.org/cgi-bin/index.cgi --WikiLinuz (talk) 21:32, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 17
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Russia–South Korea relations
- added a link pointing to Legal successor
- ZEBRA battery
- added a link pointing to Ionic conductivity
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 24
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Judge
- added a link pointing to Civil law
- Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy
- added a link pointing to Isotopic
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 1
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Judge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civil law.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 15
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Electroplating, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transfer coefficient.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Grillo-Werke
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Grillo-Werke".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 14:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.
[edit]Hello, Walter Tau. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp., a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:06, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 15
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Mearsheimer, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Russian and Ukrainian.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
An editor just deleted your bibliography. Wikipedia:WikiProject Bibliographies#Notability of bibliography articles should cover it. If you don't mind, I will split the entire "Selected works" off as John Mearsheimer bibliography, then adding a section hatnote with a link to that article. You can keep a selection of whatever you think his most notable works are in the main article. I don't know what those are so I will just keep the ones with links. Ivan (talk) 13:35, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note, I see what what you did. Although, I feel that your change made the article worse not better (I do not see any logic behibd your change), I am not going to fight you on this. Walter Tau (talk) 14:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. Feel free to put it back if you want. But the editor who made the deletion is very persistent, and was once a Wikipediametric member. I unfortunately don't have time for another debate, or the will to accept the associated risks. Ivan (talk) 21:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Howdy. I learned today about WP:NOTDATABASE policy. So, you were right about moving the Mearsheimer's bibliography to a separate bibliography article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer_bibliography.
- I also found out today, that there is an alternative to bibliography articles:
- it is called Publications' List in wikipedia.
- The List can be placed into wiki-data [3], and a link to wiki-data can be provided in the wiki-article.
- Nevertheless, I feel that your way (bibliography article ) is better.
- I am going to try to make a bibliography article for John Goodenough now. Walter Tau (talk) 12:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! I have published the bibliography article as John B. Goodenough bibliography. Ivan (talk) 17:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you again for your contribution to John_Mearsheimer_bibliography. I am overwhelmed with a work-related project, and I do not know, when I get a chance to learn about wiki bibliography formatting. However, I can supply you with the data to make such bibliography. Regarding Mearsheimer:
- 1) are you using some citation style (like https://pitt.libguides.com/citationhelp), that I am not aware of? Or does Wikipedia recommend/require a certain style?
- No, Wikipedia allows for any style, so long as it is consistent. My usual citation style can be viewed at John Mearsheimer bibliography or Veternica bibliography, for two recent examples. What I just published as John B. Goodenough bibliography was a quick solution to convert your format to the one you requested. Ivan (talk) 19:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- 2) What I see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer_bibliography now are some missing authors (I would put the authors' names at the of the each reference after DOI).
- Sorry for that. You can use "first1" and "first2" to add them, I just didn't have the time.
- 3) What software did you use to generate this list? I can provide raw data as csv, ris or enw.
- Just search and replace. In the future, csv would be easier to work with. Ivan (talk) 19:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- 4) I see that you also added comments, such "This article was published in response to criticisms of Mearsheimer's application of the 3:1 rule". Where did they come from?
- The comments are from the sources cited in the comments, per the guidelines for annotated bibliographies. Ivan (talk) 19:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- 5) I would rather not work on Goodenough until we solve all problems with Mearsheimer.
- With the bibliography or the main page? Ivan (talk) 19:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you again for your contribution. Walter Tau. Walter Tau (talk) 18:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! I have published the bibliography article as John B. Goodenough bibliography. Ivan (talk) 17:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. Feel free to put it back if you want. But the editor who made the deletion is very persistent, and was once a Wikipediametric member. I unfortunately don't have time for another debate, or the will to accept the associated risks. Ivan (talk) 21:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Here is the rest, if you want to edit it. Most of the mass-transformations are done. Just delete everything before each "*" character and replace ". Journal Name. " with " |journal= |date="
Extended content
|
---|
201. Paliteiro C, Hamnett A, * —. "The electroreduction of dioxygen on thin films of gold in alkaline solution. J Electroanal Chem. 1987". 234(1-2): 193–211. doi:10.1016/0022-0728(87)80172-9. |
Modafinil
[edit]I previously informed you about what constitutes a reliable source in medical articles, and this topic is still here in your talk page: User_talk:Walter_Tau#LSD. But you're doing this again. I don't want to template you, but please read the Wiki policy links I posted last time. I will post them again here: WP:MEDRS (important), WP:SCHOLARSHIP, WP:RS. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- May I ask why you are picking on my edits only?
- This is a primary reference, and you are not objecting to it?
- Turner DC, Robbins TW, Clark L, Aron AR, Dowson J, Sahakian BJ (January 2003). "Cognitive enhancing effects of modafinil in healthy volunteers". Psychopharmacology. 165 (3): 260–269. doi:10.1007/s00213-002-1250-8. PMID 12417966. Walter Tau (talk) 19:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not picking on your edits. You happen to edit articles that are on my WP:WATCHLIST.And no. Primary references for this kind of material should be avoided. Did you even read the policy link I posted? See Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)#Avoid_primary_sources. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 5
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Predatory publishing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Springer.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 21:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 21
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vlad Sokolovsky, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Star Factory.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
August 2024 - non-reliable sources
[edit]Greetings! Please avoid using propaganda sources [4] thanks! ManyAreasExpert (talk) 14:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- thank you for your contributions and interest in this article.
- I added a translated text from Russian wiki with a verified reference.
- My question is why this source is considered legitimate on Russian wiki,
- which has a much serious scrutiny of this topic (including by Ukrainian users)
- than any other language version of this article,
- but you personally find it unreliable?
- Is this called "double standards"? Walter Tau (talk) 14:50, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
My question is why this source is considered legitimate on Russian wiki,
pravda.ru is propaganda and is considered as such in ru wiki as well. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 14:52, 15 August 2024 (UTC)- what suppor do you have for your statment "considered as such in ru wiki as well"?
- I am not questioning, thar you think, that you have the best intentions.
- I question, that your best intentions are NOT in line with the best intentions of othr people.
- FUrthermore, I am a staunch supporter of wiki-rules, and I feel , that you are violating them
- by allowing your PERSONAL views to interfere with the wiki-idea of CONSENSUS. Walter Tau (talk) 02:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's the editor who proposes the source is the one who needs to prove its reliability. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 15:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Where did you find this rule: "it's the editor who proposes the source is the one who needs to prove its reliability" ?
- If I question reliability of your edit here:
- ""
- there is no reference to support this statement,
- how would you respond? Walter Tau (talk) 16:02, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- See WP:BURDEN. See WP:RS regarding my edits. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 16:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- thank you for educating me. You did not answer this question about your unreferenced edit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Your_edit_without_a_reference.png .
- Should I reverse your edit now, or are you going to do it yourself? Walter Tau (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is a reference given there. The War in Ukraine’s Donbas - Google Books ManyAreasExpert (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- No, it's the editor who proposes the source is the one who needs to prove its reliability. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 15:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Also, please don't add unreferenced conclusions, as you did in [5] . This is WP:OR. Thanks! ManyAreasExpert (talk) 14:51, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- OK. Since the two of us frequently run into "unreliable sources" dispute, I would like to use this example to understand, whether you are overzealous or whether I do not understand wiki-rules (which I always find very reasonable).
- Let's start with this example:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation&diff=next&oldid=1239132294
- In June 1992, the parties reached a compromise, that Crimea would have considerable autonomy but remain part of Ukraine.[1] However, between September 1994 and March 1995 Ukrainian government abolished the Constitution of Crimea and unilateraly revocated the autonomy of the peninsula in violation of the Constitution of Ukraine and of existing agreements between Kiev and Simferopol.[2][3]
- Why did you delete this section, which refers to a Ukrainian government website (you can auto-translate in Chrome browser) and to a book published in Canada? Walter Tau (talk) 17:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
in violation of the Constitution of Ukraine and of existing agreements between Kiev and Simferopol
Only this part was removed. Where the book is saying so? ManyAreasExpert (talk) 17:24, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ Subtelny, Orest (2009). Ukraine: A History Fourth Edition. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-8020-8390-6.
- ^ Про внесення змін і доповнень до Конституції (Основного Закону) України. Верховна Рада України; Закон від 21 September 1994 № 171/94-ВР (in Ukrainian) (On Amendments to the Constitution (Basic Law) of Ukraine. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine; Law of 21 September 1994 № 171/94-VR)
- ^ Про скасування Конституції і деяких законів Автономної Республіки Крим Верховна Рада України; Закон від 17 March 1995 № 92/95-ВР [On the Abolition of the Constitution and Certain Laws of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine; Law of 17 March 1995 № 92/95-VR]. zakon4.rada.gov.ua (in Ukrainian). 18 March 1995.
August 2024
[edit]Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Russian invasion of Ukraine. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. TylerBurden (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- diff [6]. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 19:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- please provide details of what specifically you object to. Just throwing in some slogans is not in the wiki-spirit. Walter Tau (talk) 21:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- If you're going to refer to Wikipedia policies that you violate as "slogans", it doesn't seem like you're taking your editing within this contentious topic very seriously. It was already described though, you changed the text to your own WP:OR that was nowhere to be found in the cited references.
- You have already received a notice about WP:CTOP, so I'm not sure why you're risking your access to such articles by engaging in such editing, but you do you. Just don't be surprised when it's reverted and called out. TylerBurden (talk) 19:05, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- I admit, that I am still learning about wiki-policies. Only recently I started editing WP:CTOP topics, so I may not fully comprehend their peculiarities.
- On another subject: I see that Wikipedia adopted Zotero as its preferred Reference Manager: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources_with_Zotero .
- I have a large EndNote library (based on Scopus,The Lens,Web of Science) with full-text pdfs of Open Access articles
- (i.e. copying/sharing this library would not result in copyright violations).
- I will convert it to a Zotero library, and I want to make it available to other wiki-editors
- (it covers topics, that you are interested in, such as International order, Nuclear warfare etc.).
- What would be the best way to make the resulting Zotero library available to wiki-writers? Walter Tau (talk) 20:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Not sure, you could try asking at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources. TylerBurden (talk) 16:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 6
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Slavic languages
- added links pointing to Bulgarian, Polish, Slovak, West Slavic and Czech
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
September 2024
[edit]Hello, I'm Manyareasexpert. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Oleksandr Syrskyi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. [7] rambler is not reliable. Please provide quote regarding "English is better" in talk. Thanks! ManyAreasExpert (talk) 22:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your note. I fully support wiki-policy about reliable sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources. This policy was written for scientific topics, which I've been writting about for years and never had problems with sources' reliability. Unfortunately, this policy is suitable for NEITHER current events NOR for subjects, that are not normally covered in peer-reviwed literature. For example, my edit about his son, who lives in Australia, is supported by primary sources, yet no one objected to it.
- If you can give me some guidelines about reliable sources for current events (and other topics, which are not normally covered in peer-reviewed journal articles), I would appreciate it. Better yet, make these guidelines easily discoverable by others. If such guidelines do not exist, you may be in a better position than me to find someone, who can write them. Walter Tau (talk) 01:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 08:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing the List of Perrenial sources. I ahve not seen it before. Impressive work whoever made it. Walter Tau (talk) 10:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
my edit about his son, who lives in Australia, is supported by primary sources, yet no one objected to it.
This fake is also removed [8] . ManyAreasExpert (talk) 08:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)- Thank you for educating me. As soon as I started venturing outside the Word of Pure Science, I entered the Word of Fake News. This story is relevant to my question of how does one find reliable sources for topics, which are not normally covered in peer-reviwed literature? I wonder, if wiki has an explicit policy for such situations.
- Back to Syrskyi's "son" in Australia... These two UKRAINIAN sources seems to agree on the issue:
- 1) https://ukranews.com/en/news/986551-syrskyi-does-not-have-son-ivan-who-supports-russia-and-occupation-of-ukraine-center-for-countering
- 2) https://vsn-ua.translate.goog/news/u-sirskogo-je-priyomniy-sin-v-avstraliyi-rosiyani-zapustili-noviy-feyk-38826?_x_tr_sl=uk&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc
- I changed the wording in the wiki-article accordingly. Walter Tau (talk) 09:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
how does one find reliable sources for topics, which are not normally covered in peer-reviwed literature?
See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 08:25, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Schazjmd (talk) 17:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sign your comments on talk pages. Editors should not have to go to page history to identify who left a specific comment. Schazjmd (talk) 19:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 19
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Craigslist, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexa.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Copyright problem on American exceptionalism
[edit]Your edit to American exceptionalism has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.
Tips
[edit]- Your ping to Doniago at Talk:Inflection didn't work because you misspelled the editor's name and did not sign your comment. You should get a notification when a ping is successful.
- Revert only when necessary is an essay. It is not a rule, a guideline, or a policy.
- No personal attacks is a policy. Repeatedly accusing another editor of being a "deletionist" could be considered a personal attack. Comment on content, not editors.
- In your post to Doniago, you wrote
I tried several lower levels mechanisms to resolve my dispute with Remsense, but they lead nowhere.
Yet you still haven't engaged in the Talk:Inflection#Addition of Russian discussion. Always start on article talk pages. - WP:Forum shopping is a violation of the WP:CONSENSUS policy. Please don't do that in the future.
I hope these tips help. Schazjmd (talk) 15:40, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 3
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ballistic missile submarine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brest.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 10
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Kura Missile Test Range
- added a link pointing to Federal Assembly
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Referencing
[edit]At the article Nuclear power you reinstated unreferenced content that I had removed, with the edit summary Policy Violation" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_removal " by Dorsetonian. I am still working, References will be formatted later
. Although you are a long-standing editor who has made a significant number of edits, you appear to be unaware of policy - either what the term means, or what the policies actually are. Verifiability and No original research are policies - what they says is non-negotiable; whereas what you described as policy was merely an essay. You had added content which derived conclusions (original research) from unsourced content (verifiability) and I removed it, which policy states I may do - and policy states that at this point you should not have simply reinstated it: Any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source
. Dorsetonian (talk) 12:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- At Submarine power cable you have now done exactly the same. Please desist from adding unsourced commentary to Wikipedia. Although you are an experienced editor you ignored my previous attempt to engage with you, so I will issue a standard warning instead. Dorsetonian (talk) 14:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- This is not an instance of WP:2+2=4. That allows you to e.g. present a value in metres instead of feet without having to reference how you did the calculation. There is no conversion of that form within this text. Dorsetonian (talk) 10:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Submarine power cable, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Dorsetonian (talk) 14:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Your addition to Supreme Court of the United States is similarly lacking in any kind of reference, and should not be in the lead at all whilst not covered in the main body of the article per MOS:LEAD -
Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article
. Please fix these issues. Dorsetonian (talk) 14:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)- Thank you for letting me know. It is true, that I am not aware of all wiki-policies.
- Plus, I have a job and life outside of wiki, so I cannot do everything quickly and in one run.
- Sometimes I have to stop editing with an intention to return and finish it.
- I think everyone would agree, that listing the percentage of the certioraris rejected by the SCOTUS is sufficiently important for mentioning in the very first paragraph. It is one of greatest handicaps of the current US legal systems (Most other coutries have separate Constitutional Court and Final Court(s) of Appeals, and the right to appeal is non-discretionary). If this handicap is not discussed further in the article, do you think it would be better for the humankind, if you write the missing section (you do have the needed expertise) rather than to delete a correct statement from the Intro? Walter Tau (talk) 15:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Someone else has disputed the content so the point has become a bit moot but I would make the comment that "importance" is demonstrated by coverage in reliable independent sources. You use the phrase
one of the greatest handicaps of the current US legal systems
and even if "everyone" agreed with you, you'd need to back that up. Even then, it would be subjective - you could not say in wiki voice that is is one the greatest handicaps (an opinion), only that [whomever] had described it as such (a fact). Dorsetonian (talk) 11:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)- Dear Dorsetonian: thank you for your insight. Unfortunately, it looks like we replaced the original question with something else. The question is NOT whether the percentage of the certioraris rejected by the SCOTUS is sufficiently important = we all agree it is important to be somewhere in the article. The question is whether these data should be in the very first paragraph. Could you please provide some guidelines to all of us?
- When you say
we all agree
, what exactly do you mean? I have not agreed that anything you have proposed is "important", only stated that reliable third-party sources will establish whether it is or not. As far as I can see you have only also talked to @Magidin: about this, and they don't seem to agree much with you either - they disputed and removed your text, and subsequently said to youplease don't say that I proposed an "addition" that I did not propose. I did no such thing, and nothing I wrote there suggests that I am proposing that paragraph as an addition
. So as far as I can see, no-one has agreed with you at all. Anyway, your guidance about whether something belongs in the lead (if that is what you mean byfirst paragraph
) comes from the above, and MOS:LEAD which states that only themost important
points should be summarised in the lead. So far you have not demonstrated that it even belongs in the article body. Further discussion belongs at Talk:Supreme Court of the United States where Magidin has already directed you, and has disagreed with adding anything to the lead. If you wish to solicit further opinion, that is the place to do it - however, I do not feel sufficiently familiar with the US legal system to contribute on specific content. Dorsetonian (talk) 06:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- When you say
- Dear Dorsetonian: thank you for your insight. Unfortunately, it looks like we replaced the original question with something else. The question is NOT whether the percentage of the certioraris rejected by the SCOTUS is sufficiently important = we all agree it is important to be somewhere in the article. The question is whether these data should be in the very first paragraph. Could you please provide some guidelines to all of us?
- You have enough time to make a fancy user page, so you should certainly have enough time to simply add a source for content you are inserting into articles. This is basic Wikipedia policy, WP:VERIFY. TylerBurden (talk) 10:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- Someone else has disputed the content so the point has become a bit moot but I would make the comment that "importance" is demonstrated by coverage in reliable independent sources. You use the phrase
In use
[edit]You might find Template:In use helpful. Schazjmd (talk) 17:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- thank you for letting me know. I was unaware of Template:In use Walter Tau (talk) 18:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Thank you.
You completely changed some text, apparently on the basis it did not seem right to you (I cannot believe, that all these years this lies were standing in wiki. Karelia has no access to the Baltic Sea or Atlantic Ocean. Its only access is to the White Sea, and it is vert fishery :)
). Yet the text that was there was referenced, and if you checked the reference you would have seen it confirmed that it was correct as it was. I have reverted you. Dorsetonian (talk) 07:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
@Dorsetonian: Dear Dosrsetonian: it is always fun to bump into you. I often agree with your reversals, but not this time. The only sea Karelia has access to today is White Sea. I know it, because I lived in Karelia- but this does not count on Wikipedia. For this reason I refer you to a map from Encyclopedia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/place/Arctic-Ocean and Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:White_Sea_map.png , or this https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/map-karelia-handdrawn-illustration-symbols-tourist-568478161 . Karelia used to have access to the Gulf of Finland (Baltic Sea, Atlantic Ocean), but that territory (Karelian isthmus) was transferred to Leningrad Oblast' in the 1940's. I would appreciate, if you restore my edit yourself. Walter Tau (talk) 12:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- You need to find a reference to support your view. You may be right, but people are often mistaken no matter how strong their convictions, and on Wikipedia, WP:V prevails. And in this case, even if you are right in that you say, you simply changed the text to claim that the 89.9 thousand tons were caught from the White Sea for which there is absolutely no evidence, which you left falsely referenced. If you don't get a grasp on WP:V you will run into major problems here. Dorsetonian (talk) 12:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- thank you for getting back to me. Does the map from Britannica count as WP:V? I do not have access to my edit about <<89.9 thousand tons were caught from the White Sea>> (can I see it?), but I've got that infor from Karelian-language wiki, translated and pasted into English wiki. Do I understand correctly, that I should have provided a references for that copy-paste? Is it OK , if the reference is in Karelian? Google does not translate Karelian yet.
- The Britannica map says nothing about the fish caught. You can see your text here - look for the "history" tab on the page to see the edits to the page. In general, non-English references are ok, but you can never use Wikipedia itself (any language edition) as a reference. The reference on the page, however, states that in the first nine months of 2021, 89,900 tons of fish were caught in the Barents Sea and the Atlantic Ocean, and 306 tons were caught in the White Sea, which is at odds with what you are claiming. Dorsetonian (talk) 13:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- I assumed, that once the infor is in one-language wiki, it is reliable for all languages. I understand, that this assumption was wrong. What I wrote was about Karelia's access to the White Sea= which is correct. Let's keep in en.wiki . As far as this reference goes https://rk.karelia.ru/ekonomika/pochti-90-tysyach-tonn-ryby-vylovili-karelskie-rybaki-za-tri-kvartala-etogo-goda/ , I did not check it myself. I translated the text about fishing from either Russian or Karelian wiki and copied that reference from the other-language-wiki site. When I checked the original ...rk.karelia.ru... it does not look like a reliable source under wiki-guidelines. Thus, I do not dispute your deletion of it.
- I cannot follow what you are saying. You did not write anything about access to the White Sea in the article text, nor did you add any reference. Dorsetonian (talk) 10:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- I assumed, that once the infor is in one-language wiki, it is reliable for all languages. I understand, that this assumption was wrong. What I wrote was about Karelia's access to the White Sea= which is correct. Let's keep in en.wiki . As far as this reference goes https://rk.karelia.ru/ekonomika/pochti-90-tysyach-tonn-ryby-vylovili-karelskie-rybaki-za-tri-kvartala-etogo-goda/ , I did not check it myself. I translated the text about fishing from either Russian or Karelian wiki and copied that reference from the other-language-wiki site. When I checked the original ...rk.karelia.ru... it does not look like a reliable source under wiki-guidelines. Thus, I do not dispute your deletion of it.
- The Britannica map says nothing about the fish caught. You can see your text here - look for the "history" tab on the page to see the edits to the page. In general, non-English references are ok, but you can never use Wikipedia itself (any language edition) as a reference. The reference on the page, however, states that in the first nine months of 2021, 89,900 tons of fish were caught in the Barents Sea and the Atlantic Ocean, and 306 tons were caught in the White Sea, which is at odds with what you are claiming. Dorsetonian (talk) 13:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 25
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nuclear power, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hungarian.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
October 2024
[edit]Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at Wikipedia:Teahouse, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
INdent
[edit]Please wp:indent your replies properly as it is making it hard to follow your agruments. Slatersteven (talk) 14:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not only that, Walter Tau is repeatedly failing to sign their comments, I don't think that should be happening given that it has already been clearly explained how to add signatures multiple times.
- Also veering into WP:NOTFORUM territory on Talk:Russian invasion of Ukraine. TylerBurden (talk) 13:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
[edit]Hello Walter Tau! The thread you created at the Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
See also the help page about the archival process.
The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing |
National Electronic Library
[edit]Hello, I have removed your recent addition to National Electronic Library for the time being. It looks like you added some good content, and I encourage you to clean up its various issues and resubmit. These issues include misspellings, grammatical errors, spaces which broke links and formatting, ref names which were never defined, punctuation incorrectly put after citations, weird unnecessary links like [[Russian State Library|Russian State Library]], and incomplete citations with broken formatting. All of this was submitted in an edit incorrectly described as "adding a wikilink." Please address these problems before editing the article further. Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 22:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Since you have resubmitted changes to this article, it would be great if you'd address the above issues, most of which still remain. Although Wikipedia works on a collaborative model, the onus is on the contributing editor to check their own work and make it as error-free as possible. If your intent is to improve Wikipedia, then we are working for the same goal. Please fix the ref errors, duplicate punctuation, misplaced punctuation, formatting errors, and grammatical errors. Jessicapierce (talk) 16:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you again for your help. I am unaware of any grammatical errors, that you mention. I use American spelling and I despise Cambridge comma. May I suggest, that you start metamorphosing your editing style from wiki-deletionism into wiki-impovementism? This way your contributions would be much more valuable. Also, as I mentioned earlier, I usually do the job of a wiki-dragon, and wiki-gnomes take over my edits. Here is an idea: have you considered the possibility , that you may fit into the ecological niche of a wiki-gnome? Instead of fighting, we can have a wonderful collaboration for the benefit of the humankind ! BTW, deletionism on wikipedia is justified only, when there is vandalism or copyright violations. In all other cases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CO takes precedence !!! I also want to add here an example of WP:CO =>
User Yngvadottir, who I never encountered before (the name sounds like an Icelandic woman) is taking over Orville Peck article from me , and doing the wiki-gnome ecologic role. I think that WP:CO is really the best thing about Wikipedia !!!
In WP:CO my role as a Wikipedia:WikiDragon is "to vomit up the Universe". Then WikiGnomes and WikiElves take over and format references etc. You can contribute to wiki-article by improving them, instead of deleting the work of others. In my humble opinion, the only times, when a deletion can be justified are 1) vandalism, 2) copyright violation.
Disambiguation link notification for November 2
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Orville Peck, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vogue.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Article clean-up
[edit]You should use Template:Cleanup at Orville Peck. Template:WikiProject cleanup list is for use on project pages, not on articles. Schazjmd (talk) 23:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- thank you for the infor. I am still learning new things about wikipedia, and you pointed me into the right direction :)
Further on clean-up
[edit]Hi Walter Tau. I've just reverted your second attempt to add a cleanup template at Orville Peck. You must have seen that I removed the one you had there before, indicating I believed the article didn't particularly require clean-up any more; what do you think still needs doing there by way of clean-up? Also, you appear to have just copied the name of the template from a diff (there was an arrow there). If you go to Template:Cleanup, you'll see that the way to add the template is {{Cleanup}}, and that you're expected to add a date (month and year) and a reason: they give the example {{Cleanup|reason=The article is full of incorrect capitalization.|date=November 2024}}. If someone posts a template like that without a date, a bot often comes by and adds it, but it's better not to rely on that, and the template isn't much use to anyone wanting to help if the reason isn't specified.
Speaking of clean-ups, thank you for noticing my work :-) I do indeed often do gnoming stuff. But I'm not just a wiki-gnome; most editors don't fit neatly within any of the wiki-fauna categories. And there's a large dose of humour in them; note the tongue-in-cheek discussion of excretion and flaming in the section of the wiki-dragon essay that you are quoting from. Setting that aside, the essay touches on the issue that either vomiting or defecating a mass of material onto an article can be seen as defacement; I think a dump of sources from Proquest falls under this heading, and adding semi-naked photoshoots in semi-naughty magazines to the career section of a performer's article is also questionable. Remember, we are editors, not database compilers (plus for readers who want that, articles are linked to Wikidata and usually often have a "quality control" footer with links to source aggregators like Proquest), and we are responsible for what we do in mainspace. Please use the preview button to check for things like an indented line causing unformatted lettering, and please don't rely on someone coming along to make it suitable for a reader's perusal. I've found it's also kind of fun working out how to do things, learning about templates like "As of" and gallery formatting ... but maybe that's me. In practice, the expectation of all of us as part of a collaborative enterprise is that you won't leave an article with broken formatting, and will cover a bare link reference, whether by using [ and ] to add the title or the website or something, or by using the citation templates (which are integrated into the Visual Editor, as I understand it.)
You've been around a while now; I know there's a lot to learn (I was still posting to the newbie help desk months after becoming active here), but I notice you still aren't signing your posts on talk pages, and I see you were pointed to the page about that back in 2022. That also means you can't use the ping function. If you can't easily type ~ on your device, there are buttons with squiggles on them accessible from the edit window that will insert a signature. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Orville Peck bibliography (November 11)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orville Peck bibliography and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
- Dear JJPMaste , please take a look at this article, that another user created, based on the data I submitted:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer_bibliography .
- In fact, there are Bibliography Articles on Wikipedia.
- You also did not make a proper reference for your denial.
- Please read "What Wikipedia is not" for more information" -is not specific enough.
- If you believe, that a Bibliographic Article is unappropriate, you need to specify the exact wiki-policy.
- You can agree with me, that posting "see What Wikipedia is not" for more information" can be used to falsely justify the deletion of anything. Walter Tau (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, I’m not trying to get your page deleted. Secondly, "there is another page like this" is not sufficient to justify accepting an article. Third, there is a notable difference between the two articles—one is a list of publications by someone, while the other is a list of publications about someone. Generally, the latter is considered to violate the sections of WP:NOT that I linked. JJPMaster (she/they) 20:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Orville Peck bibliography (November 11)
[edit]- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Orville Peck bibliography and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Talkback
[edit]You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
JJPMaster (she/they) 15:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Russo-Ukrainian War
[edit]Hello @Walter Tau:. 3 quick things. 1) Actually, not that it matters, but I'm the one with more experience. If we use edit count as a metric, about 10 times more than you (Me, You). 2) I did provide a policy based reason for my revert, it's WP:OR. See the revert comment here. and 3) Please explain your statement "Keep in mid, that I have more editorial privileges, than you have". Please be very specific in your explanation since one of the core principles of Wikipedia is that all editors are equal. Keep in mind that if I don't find your reason satisfactory, I will ask the admin board for their opinion as your statement can certainly be viewed as an attempt to impose your change by falsely claim a position of authority. --McSly (talk) 02:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
November 2024
[edit]You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Russo-Ukrainian War. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. The attempts to pull rank also come off as bullying and should not be continued. signed, Rosguill talk 02:33, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Noting also that Walter Tau has been informed of WP:ARBEE, this combo of policy violations despite this is arguably block worthy. TylerBurden (talk) 19:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- To TylerBurden : 1)this is the first time I hear about WP:ARBEE. Thank you for this suggestion.
2) Could you please specify how many reversal constitute an WP:Edit warring, and how many reversal I have made? This is very important, because I suspect, that you made it up.Walter Tau (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Wow, this was possibly the worst response you could have written. I'm going to go ahead and impose a topic-ban from the Russo-Ukrainian war. You clearly need to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines before engaging further with WP:CTOPs signed, Rosguill talk 19:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
I (however) will tell you so you can avoid it in the future) 1st Revert [[9]] 2nd revert [[10]] 3rd revert [[11]] at this stage you are at wp:3rr and are therefore edit waring. Slatersteven (talk) 11:39, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- However, as should be clear from reading the notice and WP:EW, any amount of edit warring can be disruptive. If you're adding a large new section that essentially shifts the POV of the entire article as a whole and it gets challenged, there's really no basis for belaboring the point. You should have gone straight to the talk page and desisted from reverts after the first time you were reverted, and certainly after the second time. 3RR is not an entitlement, it is a red line at which all other excuses and mitigating factors disappear. signed, Rosguill talk 18:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction
[edit]The following sanction now applies to you:
indefinitely topic-banned from the Russo-Ukrainian war, broadly construed
You have been sanctioned for tendentious edit warring, immediately followed by wikilawyering poorly about the definition of edit warring and claiming ignorance of the arbitration measures which you had previously been notified
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything above is unclear to you. signed, Rosguill talk 19:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Just to note that this is a clear violation of the topic ban, and I expect an uninvolved administrator to block you, for the first time possibly short-term.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Revision as of 14:42, 26 November 2024 Ban 19:49, 26 November 2024. Slatersteven (talk) 15:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- This [[12]] however just post dates the ban. Slatersteven (talk) 15:01, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, you are right. Ymblanter (talk) 15:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User:Walter Tau/sandbox
[edit]A tag has been placed on User:Walter Tau/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
The user is topic-banned as a result of arbitration enforcement, see their talk page
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ymblanter (talk) 14:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 29
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sodium-ion battery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BYD.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)