Hi no problem! The article was a realy useless stub and after searching literature I found out that the hype for a new superconductor in 2008 was somewhat stupid because the material is a known superconductor since 2006. But for the next few months there will be a lot of groups doing the stupid game of mixing all kinds of Oxides with all kinds of arsenides and dope it with flouride to break the record. This will bring no further scientific knowledge, but brings you onto nature or science. So the article will grow! But know I will go back to the friends at Phoenix and the TEGA instrument, to look what they have.--21:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
You've been very quick to call things stupid. I don't think either use was justified. Let's see what results arise in the next year. Rod57 (talk) 23:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not the subject is stupid, but the work to mix all kinds of things with all kinds of things to get into nature. The subject will create also good science, when people try to understand what the underlying physics are and if cuprates and oxypnictide have the same physical background. Upto now only a class of substances was found, this is OK. To synthesise all members of the group is no science, this work for a robot! I had to do stupid work like this for my PhD, thats why I do not like it!--Stone (talk) 06:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of Powder in Tube
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Powder in Tube, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. [...] You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised [...] Woland (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do appreciate the comments you have made to Gold coin, but I think your edits will be stronger based if they were sourced. I encourage you to find sources and to improve the section you changed by adding them. Let me know if you need help.
Hi Miguel, The 3 or 4 statements that have been queried were there before my edit (which was mainly to add a subsection heading and move one paragraph out of the subsection. I think the original contributors could easier justify their contributions. Rod57 (talk) 17:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, but it would be very difficult at this stage to find who did those contributions. Since they have been challenged (asking for sources) the whole section could be removed in the future if sources are not provided. I thought I would let you know, since you might help to put it back on track. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. I've provided a source for two of the challenges in Gold coin#Counterfeits. The other two seem too obvious to need a source. Do you think they could be untrue or just not worth mentioning ? Rod57 (talk) 14:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, I have removed one of your sources, since this is a site that basically clones content from Wikipedia, hence it is not reliable (is the same as sourcing the same article). Once thing to remember is that Wikipedia is read by any sort of folks, so what for you might seem obvious, for others may not. I would suggest to find sources for it or to remove it since it can be seen as speculation without the proper sources. Let me know if you need help. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
thanks, & I do need help. When you insert the fact template at the end of a paragraph are you challenging the entire paragraph, or just the last sentence or clause ? (It might help to put the words being challenged into italic.) I have split two of the paragraphs at what I hope are logical places. I still feel most of the content you have challenged is easily verified if anyone doubts it (although it seems self evidently true). Could you move this discussion (or rather your explanation of what exactly you are challenging) to the article talk page so others can contribute ? I dont mind what you do to the article itself. Rod57 (talk) 16:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
New content provided. Rod57 (talk) 04:00 13 December 2008 (UTC)
2009
Citation suggestion
Hi. thank you for your contributions to the transcription factor article! In case you haven't already seen this, check out the template filler tool. Given a PMID, you can quickly create a fully formatted {{cite journal}} template that can be directly copied and pasted into a Wikipedia article. Using this tool can save you a lot of work and insure that citations are displayed in a consistent way. Cheers. Boghog2 (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated ALD518, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ALD518. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
You asked me to reconsider my delete, but I am not the least convinced, and have explained why. You claim UK newspaper coverage: let's see it DGG ( talk ) 02:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was 10,000 not 100,000 IU/d that was in the statement I recalled. It is still in the article. Here is the paragraph. Some of the diagrams in the refs are interesting, and may answer your questions.
Exposure to sunlight for extended periods of time does not normally cause vitamin D toxicity.[1] This is because within about 20 minutes of ultraviolet exposure in light skinned individuals (3–6 times longer for pigmented skin) the concentration of vitamin D precursors produced in the skin reach an equilibrium, and any further vitamin D that is produced is degraded.[2] According to some sources, maximum endogenous production with full body exposure to sunlight is approximately 250 µg (10,000 IU) per day.[1] According to Holick, "the skin has a large capacity to produce cholecalciferol", and he produces some data demonstrating that
"[W]hole-body exposure to one minimal erythemal dose of simulated solar ultraviolet radiation is comparable with taking an oral dose of between 250 and 625 micrograms (10 000 and 25 000 IU) vitamin D."[2]
^ abHolick M (1995). "Environmental factors that influence the cutaneous production of vitamin D". Am J Clin Nutr. 61 (3 Suppl): 638S –645S. PMID7879731.
Hi there! Thanks very much for your addition to the ISS article regarding recent debris avoidance maneouvres. I've moved and merged your paragraph into the 'Orbital debris' section (which is where the rest of the DAM material is found), but I was wondering if you could please verify the reliability for the sources you used; the ISS article is featured, and so all references have to be very reliable to maintain the quality - if you could provide a rationale for them on the talk page, or provide alternatives, that'd be great. Colds7ream (talk) 16:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rod57, this is a message from an automated bot, regarding Talk:Thames Archway. You blanked the page and, since you are its sole author, FrescoBot has interpreted it as a request for deletion of the page and asked administrators to satisfy the requests per speedy deletion criterion G7. Next time you want a page that you've created deleted, you can explicitly request the deletion by inserting the text {{db-author}}. If you didn't want the page deleted, please remove the {{db-author}} tag from the page and undo your blanking or put some content in the page. Admins are able to recover deleted pages. ... To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=FrescoBot}} somewhere on your talk page. -- FrescoBot (msg) 00:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.
Any interest in dermatology? If so, we are always looking for more help at the Dermatology task force, particularly with the ongoing Bolognia push. I can e-mail you the login information if you like? There is still a lot of potential for many new articles and redirects. ---kilbad (talk) 21:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Parkinson's disease (possible neuroprotective effect of Q10)
I have reverted your last addition: while the reference you provide is reviewed is only a primary source. Secondary sources used in the article have already balanced your source with others and concluded that there is not enough evidence to support the neuroprotective effect of Q10. Per WP:MEDRS a secondary source prevails. Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 13:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at the Nice-guideline page 53, which talks about two articles on Q10 (one being your addition) and outlines some of its problems finally concluding "The small neuroprotection trials performed with co-enzyme Q10 in PD so far have been encouraging, but further evidence is required before it can be recommended routinely." and "Co-enzyme Q10 should not be used as a neuroprotective therapy for people with PD, except in the context of clinical trials."
Additionally in Obeso-2010: "Several molecules have been proposed as potential neuroprotective agents against Parkinson's disease. Molecules that reduce dopamine cell death include monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors (selegiline, rasagiline), anti-apoptotic agents (TCH346, CEP-1347), glutamate antagonists, promitochondrial drugs (coenzyme Q10, creatine), calcium channel blockers (isradipine) and growth factors (GDNF)113. However, none of these molecules has definitively shown neuroprotective effects in clinical trials114. This may indicate the ineffectiveness of these compounds, but may also be a consequence of the limitations of clinical-trial design115—use of the wrong dose, recruitment of too broad a patient population or selection of inappropriate endpoints". Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have been working in this article for some months and any help is welcomed. However I am trying to use only high quality secondary sources (reviews in peer-reviewed journals) which are the preferred sources per WP:MEDRS. I would greatly appreciate if you could back up any assertions introduced in the article with this kind of sources. Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 13:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I don't have access to the full text of Obeso. I'm not sure that its dismissal of CoQ10 is justified since the 2002 study was randomised and did show a statistically significant effect at 1200mg/d. Secondary sources may be preferred but the primary source seems justified by the data it provides. It's only a clinical study - not a medical recommendation. Most disease articles mention treatments under investigation. Rod57 (talk) 14:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly the PD article doesn't seem to link to the NICE guidelines so I haven't read them, but the quote you give seems to support and even justify my addition rather than oppose it. Can you say what problems they found with the 2002 study ?
It is cited many times: see those citations begining with "The National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions, ed (2006)". We follow exactly the sources when we say: "Several molecules have been proposed as potential treatments.[40] However none of them has been conclusively demonstrated to reduce degeneration in clinical trials. (This includes Q10). Feel free to bring here a review that says that it has been proven its usefulness.--Garrondo (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I feel Garrondo's evidence supports my addition rather than his deletion of it [1] . I will come back to this issue if/when I get time. Rod57 (talk) 14:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Garrondo above quotes only part of Obeso 2010, which continues "coenzyme Q10 (ref. 119) and selegiline—have had positive outcomes in terms of reducing the progression of motor deficits in early Parkinson's disease." Gypsydoctor (talk) 18:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
TNBC disambiguation
Hi, I saw you move/disambiguation work. I must say, I don't think it was done correctly.
Firstly, there's a factual issue. "TNBC" was the correct name of the programming block; it was never called "Teen NBC". Even though that's what the name came from, the initialism was never spelled out, even partly. Therefore moving it creates a factual error of the title, and needs to be reverted to ensure that readers aren't mislead.
Secondly, a disambiguation page is unneeded. As there is only one other article on the page, which is at a title other than the initialism, a disambiguation hatnote using the {{about}} template would not only suffice, it'd be more accurate.
So in short, TNBC should be the article on the programming block, as it is the only factually correct title, but that article should be edited to include the hatnote:oknazevad (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback. I thought other uses of TNBC would eventually require or justify a disambiguation page. Would a better name for the "Teen NBC" page be "TNBC (something)" eg "TNBC (TV channel)" ? or would it be better to have a "TNBC (disambiguation)" page ? Rod57 (talk) 13:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A disambiguator should only be used when both articles have the exact same name. As neither of these do, there's no need for a parenthetical disambiguator. And we really don't need a disambiguation page for two entries, especially when one doesn't have the actual title "TNBC (something)". If there's something else that may, eventually, require a dismabiguation page, then it can be created. In short, a hatnote will do. [Oknazevad]
That doesn't seem to be how disambiguation pages are used in wikipedia.
If/when a disamb page is needed what should we do :
a) Have TNBC with hatnote to "TNBC (disambiguation)" ?
b) Have "TNBC (TV channel)" and TNBC being the disambiguation page ?
I guess (a) since TNBC was created first - or shouldn't creation order matter ?
Hm, depends on whether any of the other uses are exactly known by the initialism "TNBC". If not, then TNBC should be the programming block and the others should be at TNBC (disambiguation) which would be linked by a hatnote at the programming block page. If any of the others are known only by the initialism, then we have to consider WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.oknazevad (talk) 22:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I dont think any are known only by the initialism so I'll make TNBC (disambiguation) as you suggest. Rod57 (talk) 01:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC) ... I can't do the move as I'm not an admin so I've edited the move request into the Teen NBC talk page. Apologies for the trouble. Rod57 (talk) 02:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed this edit to the page Click chemistry and am unsure of whether or not to move the comment from the main page to the talk page, or delete it being misinformation. Since you've edited this page before recently, I'm wondering if you know. -WarthogDemon18:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an expert on click chemistry and am not even sure the comment is correct (since it's not clear to me which is the final product) but I think a suitable comment should stay on the main page as most readers won't look at the talk page. Someone should probably ask the creator of the image to clarify/correct. I'd be inclined to put the comment as italics and in brackets () to hint that it is a later comment. Rod57 (talk) 23:08, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple myeloma
Concerning these edits, could I persuade you to format the references you added into citation templates, to make the references more consistent with the style used in the remainder of the article? It is also unnecessary to mention in the text that your source was published in a particular year, and probably even that it was a review. JFW | T@lk21:16, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've made the refs into cite templates (I often do but was a bit rushed when I did these). I've left the "2009 review" comments (eg in Multiple_myeloma#Maintenance_therapy) as I feel they are helpful and seem the easiest way to indicate the date and type of source, which given the patchwork nature of many WP medical articles, many readers and later editors may find useful as medical opinions evolve over the years. Rod57 (talk) 00:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Edits to MRSA - minor or not - September 2010
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Although the removal of the spurious space was, indeed, minor, the addition of a link does not appear to meet the criteria outlined in WP:MINOR. — UncleBubba( T@C )01:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My [removed] edit was mention of a phase I trial. Better I guess to wait until phase II reports encouraging preliminary results. - Rod57 (talk) 08:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! regarding this edit: As far as I know, MedicalNewsToday isn't Public Domain and so copying text from there counts as a copyright violation, so I removed the text. If I am wrong and the site is PD, please feel free to re-add it. Thanks, ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 20:25, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies; I thought (from other articles) that attributed quotes were acceptable. I've tried to add a summary of the extra info. Rod57 (talk) 00:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work with this article! Under certain circumstances (that I've never fully understood myself), short quotations are acceptable. Wikipedia:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources seems to limit this to "one or two sentences". Anyway, I'd only use quotes if absolutely indispensable to be on the safe side – for example, a paragraph from a literary author to illustrate their style. I don't think it's ever necessary to use a quotation from a scientific source; you can always paraphrase. Happy editing! --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 07:35, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your last edition: since it is only based in a recent primary study in a mouse model it is probably too premature for inclusion in main article. I am going to move it to the pathophisiology subarticle. If there was a review supporting its claims it would may merit inclussion in main article. Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 07:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you wish. FWIW this was mentioned in the UK national press.
I mean a secondary reliable source (review in a peer-reviewed journal indicating that it is a notable research direction). Media press is not reliable to see the importance of an article. They have an even higher recentism bias than wikipedia.--Garrondo (talk) 07:22, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
APA -> Aldosterone-Producing Adenoma -> Conn's syndrome
Hi there. In this edit you added Aldosterone-Producing Adenoma to the APA dab page. I had a look at the article it redirects to, and it does not mention "Aldosterone-Producing Adenoma", and obviously it should, as that's where it redirects. But I'm a bit hesitant as to the right place. Is it a synonym of Conn's syndrome? Can you please add it in the correct place? Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think it is a synonym : Primary aldosteronism says "When it occurs due to a solitary aldosterone-secreting adrenal adenoma (a type of benign tumor), it is known as Conn's syndrome". : I had Aldosterone-Producing Adenoma redirect to Conn's syndrome (which redirected to Primary aldosteronism. Unless there is a technical reason (eg multiple redirects that dont work) why this should not be done I think this was better (clearer) than your redirecting directly to Primary aldosteronism because in the future Conn's syndrome may change from a redirect to an article in its own right.
Sadly, Wikipedia does not support multi-redirects, so Aldosterone-Producing Adenoma cannot redirect to Conn's syndrome. Even if I left this redirect, a bot will "correct" it. That's a technical problem that we have to live with.
I am not arguing anything. My understanding of the life sciences is in a high school level, so I don't even understand half of what you said. All I said is that I think the term "Aldosterone-Producing Adenoma" should appear somewhere in Primary aldosteronism, and knowing nothing of the subject I'm at a loss as to where to add it. If you say it's a synonym for Conn's Syndrome, I'll add it there. Have a look at Primary aldosteronism and see if I did it correctly please. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 21:45, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your change makes what was there before somewhat confusing so I have added the bold term in a separate sentence instead to avoid any confusion. Rod57 (talk) 13:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Rod57. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 23:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\
A tag has been placed on Reactor period, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.
If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 12:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Might be a tad pedantic, but the protein will be 43 aminoacids (no N-term methionine). N-term is acetylated, though I've no idea if that can be shown in single letter code.
Even more pedantic - this is the human protein. All placental mammal orthologues are identical, marsupials have E8Q and amphibians differ even more. I'm not editing at present because not being an experienced Wikipedian, I'm unsure whether this level of detail is appropriate. Jgedwards (talk) 23:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi J, Thanks. IMO pedantic detail is fine in an encyclopedia. I wasn't aware of the n-terminal acetylation and lack of methionine and was just trying to follow the source [to give an idea of the protein size]. I'll add that this is the sequence in humans. Do you have a source for it being for placental mammals ?
There's no need to be experienced to edit. Level-of-detail/pedantry can [also] be discussed on article talk pages so others can contribute. Thanks again. - Rod57 (talk) 14:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You added a statement to the Simvastatin article in 2008 stating, "In the UK in 2008 the typical per patient cost to the NHS of simvastatin is approx £1.50." Since then, someone tagged your statement with "Citation needed" to request a citation to provide authority for the claim. Do you have one? I would like to read a reliable source on monthly cost for this drug. Thank you. — O'Dea (talk) 23:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Talkback re List of artificial objects in heliocentric orbit
{{talkback|Talk:List of artificial objects in heliocentric orbit|Inconsistent re Upper stages|ts=21:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)}}
Hi Rod. A long time ago you placed a comment in this Talk page. I just responded. Cheers. N2e (talk) 21:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The guideline says " The given order of sections is also encouraged but may be varied, particularly if that helps your article progressively develop concepts and avoid repetition".
In most cases, including colorectal cancer it flows much better IMO to go from Diagnosis to Management, and to have Prevention (at least primary prevention) immediately before Epidemiology. I might suggest that on the guidelines talk page one day. - Rod57 (talk) 05:22, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jmh649, You reverted my changes to colorectal cancer saying 'references required'. Are you asking for references in this article (maybe because you doubted my additions were true) or because they weren't easy to find in the linked articles ? Also, I'd be grateful, if you revert my changes, if you'd mention it on my talk page please so I can deal with it while it's fresh in my mind. -Rod57 (talk) 11:59, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The virotherapy article seems almost exclusively about RIGVIR. I said 'soviet' because the work (on RIGVIR) was carried out in Latvia whilst it was part of the soviet union. Would you prefer we changed it to 'Latvian work' or perhaps 'Mainly RIGVIR (Latvian)' ? - Rod57 (talk) 04:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization consisting of over 28,000 volunteers in more than 100 countries. The collaboration was formed to organize medical scholarship in a systematic way in the interests of evidence-based research: the group conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account. Thank you Cochrane!
If you are stil active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)
Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives
Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).
[This reversion] I suspect was based purely on my edit summary since the reversion comment relates only to what's in the edit summary. Reverter made no mention of my other changes he reverted.
A new reference tool
Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I missed this notification - too late to contest - perhaps the SD should have just been a merge suggestion - looks like he did - see below. - Rod57 (talk) 02:57, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remember that when adding medical content please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:13, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Rod, I saw you're a member of WP:Energy and that you had posted on the talk page for efficient energy use. I proposed a few edits to the article as whole over there; could you take a look at them if you've got a moment? As to your point about reverting the title of the article to "energy efficiency", I agree that it's a better title, but I'm not sure if it can be implemented as long as the disambiguation page holds the actual title.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 02:11, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@FacultiesIntact: Hi, I only had a quick look but your change from Vehicles to Transportation looks helpful. I notice the current article now has a section on Australia (which I suggested be split out). I think the article should be split into Energy efficiency programmes/initiatives (which can summarise what various nations and organisations are proposing and doing) and Energy efficiency principles - but it would be too much work for me. I'll mention it on the talk page. - Rod57 (talk) 14:38, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
The Cure Award
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.
Thanks! Happy to talk about your perceptions of my editing here or at my talk page... that just doesn't belong on an article Talk page.Jytdog (talk) 21:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Books & Bytes - Issues 16 - 19
Issue 16, February-March 2016
A new cite archive template, ...
Metrics for the Wikipedia Library's last three months
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2016 Cure Award
In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.
Good. I didn't know whether I should do it myself. This doesn't qualify as a medical source on Wikipedia, though there are usually links to acceptable sources. And I see you previously did this for CART.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:23, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I have struggled with this too. Way too much of the discussion about CAR-T ignores that it is a cell therapy, with all the baggage that comes with that. The CAR article should really just have the details of the receptor component, in my view. Jytdog (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also noticed there's some overlap in content on the Immunotherapy page. Maybe this content can be consolidated into one page instead of spread across three different pages? Mainly I want to find a better location to post research from big Pharama companies researching Checkpoint Inhibitors and some of the more notable studies/failures/new drugs on this. (Note) One new source I'd like to add/integrate with this: [5]
@Doc James: I had made this edit because on first reading 'person' could have referred to 'healthy donor'. The FDA reference describes the patients cells being engineered (which clears up the ambiguity). Note to self to review MEDMOS on this. - Rod57 (talk) 11:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2017 Cure Award
In 2017 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.
I was browsing articles tagged as too technical and R-SMAD came up. I saw you edited the article a couple of years ago, and was wondering if you think the article, along with I-SMAD, should be merged into SMAD (protein), as there don't seem to be enough sources to support separate articles on both. Thanks, and please tag me when you reply! Enterprisey (talk!) 07:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Enterprisey - I-SMAD could easily be merged (and might as well be), and possibly R-SMAD with a bit more care - but best to also suggest it on the relevant pages with {{Merge to|SMAD (protein)}} and let people respond on the talk pages. - Rod57 (talk) 10:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
EDL redirected, questioned, still to be fixed
Greetings Rod57! I wanted to notify you that I have redirected your stub Entry, descent and landing to the pre-existing article Atmospheric entry, which already covers the topic in great detail. There may be value in writing a section there as an overview of the various challenges for EDL at Earth and Mars, based partly on your prose. Let me know what you think. — JFGtalk20:21, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@JFG: Hi JFG - Thanks for letting me know - but I feel your redirect is unhelpful - Entry is just one phase of EDL and the Atmospheric entry article correctly only covers the entry phase. The issues in Descent and Landing are very different and should not go in the large Entry article. The EDL stub/article (correctly IMO) linked to Atmospheric entry, and the Descent and Landing sections could be expanded and linked to current or future specific articles. (EDL is discussed as a thing - see many NASA docs - eg as each phase has to cope with the results of the previous one). Please consider undoing your redirect. - Rod57 (talk) 10:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Inquiry from a Public Relations Representative for Biogen on Assessing Wikipedia Article
Hello Rod57,
My name is Matt Nemet and I am a Public Relations professional at GCI Health, an agency specializing in healthcare. We’re reaching out on behalf of our clients at Biogen to potentially update outdated information found on the Wikipedia page for its multiple sclerosis treatment candidate, opicinumab.
We’re reaching out to you because we know Wikipedia users depend on active, qualified editors for accurate and supported articles. We felt that given your previous efforts editing Wikipedia pages like pembrolizumab you might be interested in reviewing this page through the lens of updating older information.
To further disclose our position, we are aware that per Wikipedia’s guidelines neither the company nor the company’s representatives can make direct edits to Wikipedia pages. Respecting these rules, our priority is ensuring that the Wiki has the most up-to-date information – we’re reaching out in the hopes you may be able to assess the current state of the page against publicly available information on Biogen and opicinumab to make accurate and appropriate updates.
Please let me know if you have any follow-up questions.
Hi Matt, If you know of any third party publications, peer reviewed publications, or independent/disinterested discussion of opicinumab (ideally not based on biogen press releases) you could mention them on talk:opicinumab (for everyone to consider) and, if you wish, ping me or mention my name (like I have here: MSN2017) to notify me as well. or you can email me ("email-this-user" under Tools on the LHS of my talk or user pages). - Rod57 (talk) 19:39, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Rod57, Thanks for your response! We’re planning to share references for consideration via the Opicinumab talk page and will be sure to tag you for visibility. Best, MSN2017 (talk) 21:15, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article now has a map with all the important radiotelescopes and the positions. However it stolen from the German Wikipedia, so you might change the name of the templates (I could not find the English equivalent), but it also works to my surprise. As it contains more than just the deep space network, you might reuse it also somewhere else, you just need to eliminate the unnecessary parts.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 23:45, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
BTW the article is massively outdated and represents the situation (at least) six years ago. Within the next five years (after Qitai is finished) China will be the number 1 player in radioastronomy by a mile and even now it has a deep space network with several huge dishes, that is more capable than Esas ESTRACK network, especially with the big dishes in Tian Ma and Jiamusi. Prepare for a manned moon mission, a manned moon orbiting space station and a manned mars mission (or at least a serious attempt) after that.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 00:04, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Today it says "Planned improvements by 2012 : A new 35-meter antenna at the Kashgar station. & A 64-meter antenna in Jiamusi. (~130°E)". Do you have sources for their completion and use ?)
You might use the sources of the German Version (it´s all in English). I´ts hard to find any sources at all. For the unsourced parts you can confirm the real existence of the dishes in google maps at least. I got some of the positions out of several blogs, which are not valid sources for Wikipedia.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 12:50, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You have been a member of Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMEDF) in the past. Your membership, however, appears to have expired. As such this is a friendly reminder encouraging you to officially rejoin WPMEDF. There are no associated costs. Membership gives you the right to vote in elections for the board. The current membership round ends in 2020.
As you suggested, the Follicular lymphoma page has been undated with sections on transformed follicular lymphoma. (talk) 13:31, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Books & Bytes – Issue 35, July – August 2019
~
We're building something great, but.. (need translators and coders )
Hello, Rod57. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's rocketry-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Rocketry? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's rocketry-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. Please see our list of open tasks for ideas on where to get started.
Hello, Rod57. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
The Soyuz MS-17 launched on 14 October 2020, 05:45:04 and docked after a "two-orbit rendezvous flight plan" to the ISS only three hours later at 08:48:47 UTC.
The OSIRIS-REx probe successfully makes brief touchdown and collects a sample from the asteroid Bennu at 22:13 UTC on 20 October 2020.
Expedition 63 ended on 21 October 2020, 23:32 UTC after 187 days, 21 hours and 38 minutes duration.
John Herschel Glenn Jr. (July 18, 1921 – December 8, 2016) was a United States Marine Corps aviator, engineer, astronaut, businessman and politician. He was the third person and the first American to orbit the Earth, circling it three times in 1962. Following his retirement from NASA, he served from 1974 to 1999 as a Democratic United States Senator from Ohio; in 1998, he flew into space again at age 77.
Image of the month.
Captured on Oct. 20, 2020 during the OSIRIS-REx mission’s Touch-And-Go (TAG) sample collection event, this series of images shows the SamCam imager’s field of view as the NASA spacecraft approaches and touches down on asteroid Bennu’s surface, over 200 million miles (321 million km) away from Earth.
The ISS has been continuously occupied for the last 20 years! Expedition 1 arrived on 2 November 2000 with the first long-term residents. That’s longer then Wikipedia has existed.
Arianespace had a launch failure after liftoff of its Vega rocket on the 17th November. Two satellites were lost due to an integration error of the fourth stage.
This is an image of the ISS from December 9, 2000. Almost 20 years ago, this image is one of a series of 70mm frames taken onboard Space Shuttle Endeavour. With the ISS being continuously occupied for the last 20 years, this shows how the space station has developed over the years.
Since October, 43 new pages have been added to Spaceflight. There has been 2 more images which have reached FM class, both GA and B classes have 1 more article. 5 more lists have been added to the project. While 25 articles have been improved to C class as well as 24 articles reaching start class and 5 new articles added to stub class.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributors: OkayKenji and Terasail
The Chang’e 5 lander landed on the moon on December 1st, and started to gather lunar samples.
The Chang’e 5 ascent module launched from the moons surface on December 3rd and later docked with the service module in lunar orbit.
Hayabusa-2 has successfuly returned samples it collected from the asteroid 162173 Ryugu. It landed in South Australia on 5th December after a 6 year mission.
SpaceX Starship SN8 completed a 12.5km flight and successfully made it back to the launch pad however was unable to slow down and hit the ground creating an impressive fireball.
China becomes the third country to terurn samples from the moon. After the Chang'e-5 return capsule lands in Inner Mongolia at 01:59 local time on December 13th.
Mary Jackson (néeWinston, April 9, 1921 – February 11, 2005) was an American mathematician and aerospace engineer at NACA, which was succeeded by NASA. She worked at Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, for most of her career. She started as a computer at the segregatedWest Area Computing division in 1951. She took advanced engineering classes and, in 1958, became NASA's first black female engineer.
Image of the month.
With China becoming the third country to return moon samples back to earth, this is an image of the Apollo 11Lunar Lander being worked on by Buzz Aldrin. This mission was the first time moon samples were brought back to earth. This image was taken over 51 years ago on July 21, 1969.
Since November, 99 new pages have been added to Spaceflight. 1 new file, with 2 more files reaching FM class. There 3 more articles have reached FA class, with an increase of 2 GA class articles. 4 more lists have been added to the project. While 13 articles have been improved to C class as well as 2 articles reaching start class and 66 new articles added to stub class.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: Terasail
You have been a member of Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMEDF) in the past. Your membership, however, appears to have expired. As such this is a friendly reminder encouraging you to officially rejoin WPMEDF. There are no associated costs. Membership gives you the right to vote in elections for the board. The current membership round ends in 2022.
The NASASpace Launch System test-fire of the core stage on 16 January triggered a shutdown due to an hydraulic system issue. The test which was intended to last eight minutes, lasted just over one minute.
Space X sets a new world record for the number of satellites launched. 143 small satellites were launched on a Falcon 9 on 24 January.
Since December, 23 new pages have been added to Spaceflight. Including 1 new file. Unfortunately there are 8 less GA class articles however there was an incrase of 13 articles at C class.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: Terasail
The Hope orbiter reached mars on 9 February 2021. Seven months after its launch on 19 July 2020.
Confirmation of the Perseverance rover successfully landing on Mars was recieved at 20:55 UTC on 18 February 2021. With the first photo from the same day.
The Mars Pathfinder is an American robotic spacecraft that landed a base station with a roving probe on Mars in 1997. It consisted of a lander, and a lightweight wheeled robotic Mars rover named Sojourner, which became the first rover to land and operate on Mars.
Image of the month.
The first 360-degree panorama taken by Mastcam-Z, on Perseverance.
Since January, 44 new pages have been added to Spaceflight and 1 file has become featured. There are 2 new files as well as 1 more C class, 4 more start class and 3 more stub class articles, with an additional 3 list articles.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: Terasail
On March 7 the Wide Field Camera 3 on Hubble Space Telescope entered safe mode after a software error was detected. And took days until the camera was fully active again. read more
The Space Launch System completed a full-duration (8 minutes and 20 seconds) static fire of the core stage on March 18, after an earler test in January failed to complete the test.
Featured Content
The Apollo 12 article was promoted to a Featured Article on March 27, 2021. After being nominated by Wehwalt who is a significant contributor to the article.
The Hubble Space Telescope was launched into low Earth orbit in 1990 and remains in operation. It was not the first space telescope, but it is one of the largest and most versatile, renowned both as a vital research tool and as a public relations boon for astronomy. The Hubble telescope is named after astronomer Edwin Hubble and is one of NASA's Great Observatories.
Image of the month.
Astronaut Roger B. Chaffee is shown at console in the Mission Control Center, Houston, Texas during the Gemini-Titan 3 flight.
Since February, 28 new pages have been added to Spaceflight and Apollo 12 has been promoted to featured article! 1 more article has reached GA-class, with 1 more file, 6 more C-class, 14 more start-class and 8 new stub class articles.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributors: Ninney & Terasail
Since March, 39 new pages have been added to Spaceflight. There is 1 less GA-class, with 3 more files, 4 more B-class, 6 more C-class, 7 more start-class and 5 new stub-class articles.
The Crew of SpaceX Crew-1 had a successful splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico on 2nd May at 06:56:33 UTC. After they launched in November 2020 and had spent 167 days in space.
A LongMarch 5B rocket had an uncontrolled re-entery into the atmosphere on 4th May. With any debris being reported to have landed in the Indian Ocean.
One of Rocket Labs Electron rockets expierienced a launch malfunction 2:30 into launch causing the mission to result in failure.
Images have been released after the landing of Zhurong rover on Mars on 14th May.
Creola Katherine Johnson was an American mathematician whose calculations of orbital mechanics as a NASA employee were critical to the success of the first and subsequent U.S. crewed spaceflights. The space agency noted her "historical role as one of the first African-American women to work as a NASA scientist".
Image of the month.
Astronaut Clayton Anderson wis shown as a water bubble floats in the middeck of space shuttle Discovery during the STS-131 mission.
Since April, 45 pages have been added to Spaceflight. 1 article reached FA-Class and 1 image reached FM-Class. There is 1 more GA class article, with 2 more B-class, 8 more C-class, 1 less start-class and 5 new stub-class articles.
Factual changes on cladribine – Request for feedback from community before edits - replied
Dear Wiki member,
I hope you are well.
I am reaching out regarding my latest contribution to the cladribine Wikipedia page. I have declared my COI and intended changes on the Talk page prior to initiating the page edit directly. I was hoping to hear from editors to ensure a smooth edit vetted by the Wikipedia community. It has now been 3 weeks and I have not received any feedback. I can see that you are quite active on other MS molecules (your contribution on the ocrelizumab, alemtuzumab or fingolimod pages for example). I was wondering if you could please advise whether it would be acceptable for me to proceed with the edits. To provide further clarification, I have suggested further unbiased detail to the current page, and have proposed some edits, all of which I have included citations for.
I invite you to consult my post here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cladribine#2021_Page_factual_update
I would greatly appreciate your feedback. I look forward to hearing from you.
Number of active members: 118.
Total number of members: 331.
Monthly Changes
Since May 28 pages ahve been added to Spaceflight. 1 article reached FA-Class, 1 list reached FL-class & 2 images reached FM-Class. There is 1 more GA class article, as well as 1 more file page. There are 4 more B class articles, 20 more C class articles, 10 less start class articles & 1 less stub article.
BOOKS are no longer supported by the WikiProject and are in the process of being deleted! See WP:BOOKSDEP & here for more.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: Terasail
On 17th July NASA announced that scientific observations from the Hubble Space Telescope had resumed on a backup computer after being placed in a "safe mode" since June 13.
On 20th July Blue Origin had their first fully crewed mission to the edge of space with Jeff Bezos onboard in a New Shepard capsule.
On 26th July The Pirs module was the first permanent ISS module to be decommissioned. After docking to the ISS on 17th September 2001, just under 20 years ago.
On 29th July The ISS was moved out of its normal orientation after the Nauka module (a new Russian module) was docked and started firing its thrusters.
Shuttle-Centaur was a version of the Centaurupper stage rocket designed to be carried aloft inside the Space Shuttle. Two variants were developed: Centaur G-Prime and Centaur G. The powerful Centaur upper stage allowed for heavier deep space probes, and for them to reach Jupiter sooner. However, neither variant ever flew on a Shuttle.
Image of the month.
This is an Extreme Deep Field image taken from the Hubble Space Telescope, released by NASA on September 25th, 2012. With exposure dates from July 2002 to March 2012.
Since June: 24 pages have been added to spaceflight. There are 4 more files. There is 1 more B class article, 5 more C class articles, 10 more start class articles & 2 more stub class articles. The 2 additional FM class have been FM for a few years, they just registered this month.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: Terasail
On 12th August a GSLV Mk.2 rocket with the EOS-03 Earth observation satellite as a payload encountered a third stage failure and crashed back into the ground after reaching a maximum altitude of 140km (87 miles).
On 20th August a 5 hour 55 minute spacewalk was completed by chinese astronauts Nie Haisheng and Liu Boming on the Tiangong space station.
On 28th August an Astra rocket had an engine failure at launch, but managed to recover and fly to the upper atmosphere before leaving its flight corridor, resulting in flight temination.
Since July: 8 pages have been added to spaceflight. There is 1 less file. There is 1 less GA class article and are 4 less B-class, 10 more C-class, 17 more start-class and 11 new stub-class articles.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: Terasail
Since August: 75 pages have been added to spaceflight. There are 3 more FA class articles, 1 more FL class page and 1 more FM class file. There are 6 less files. There are 6 more GA class articles and 1 more B-class article, 71 more C-class, 33 more start-class and 28 less stub-class articles.
Discuss & propose changes to The Downlink at The Downlink talk page. To unsubscribe from the newsletter remove your name from the Mailing list.
Newsletter contributor: Terasail
The Wikipedia Library is continuing with its design improvements. With the latest update, you can now mark collections you are authorized to access as favorites - they'll then show up in the Favorites tab, which will become the default tab for you once you've got at least one collection favorited. We hope this will make it easier to get right to the collections you're most interested in without needing to search through a bunch of other options. We've also added a filter based on whether a particular collection is indexed in the search tool (see above).
We'd love to hear what you think of the new UI - whether that's positive experiences, bugs and technical issues, or things you’d like to see changed, please share your thoughts here!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing free, full-access, accounts for several new partners:
Wiley – broad collections of online journals, books, and research resources, covering life, health, social, and physical sciences
OECD iLibrary, OECD Data, and OECD Multimedia Gallery – a repository of materials published by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
A number of existing partners have also moved to allow immediate access to all eligible editors, without requiring an application; these include Alexander Street, American Psychiatric Association, and American Psychological Association. To see which partners are available to you, visit your My Collections page. (link lost?)
Visit via the newsletter ? I have accepted the library terms of use.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Accurin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
I had created stub about 7 years ago - Decision was to delete (~ not notable ~ not approved ~ nanomedicine) - Rod57 (talk) 19:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BIND-014 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
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.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on JSCI requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either
disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.
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. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 12:48, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Books & Bytes – Issue 57
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
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.
Hello! Back in 2020, you have added to said article that 2195 is used on Vulcan Centaur: diff. So, I'm interested, where did you get it from?
It's easy to find sources about that alloy's use by SpaceX and NASA, but I haven't found anything about use by ULA. Trasheater Midtier🐉(talk) 20:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know where you saw your claim of archaeal membrane components being found in early Earth sediments being potential proof of this hypothesis came from? A citation is definitely needed there. Nungimelheshin (talk) 19:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Books & Bytes – Issue 65
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 65, September – October 2024
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.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.