|
User talk:Rowan Forest/Archive 11
Gravitational waveI'm sorry for reverting your edit in this article instead of simply editing, which would have been more appropriate. Thanks for spotting that mistake. Gap9551 (talk) 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC) Space barnstar
Thank you! -BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC) Flagship programMaybe the article "Flagship program" needs to be modified or deleted. Unlike explorer, discovery or new frontier, the so-called "program" never exists in NASA annual budget estimates documents. PSR B1937+21 (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC) Reference errors on 29 February
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) 00:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC) Should the current artist's impression be removed from the Planet Nine infobox? You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Regards, nagualdesign 15:02, 11 March 2016 (UTC) NASA Briefings/livestream (March 21 – 22, 2016) – Ceres, Mars, Pluto Results.NASA Briefings/livestream – Experts to discuss the latest Ceres, Mars, Pluto results (near Houston, TX; March 21 – 22, 2016)[1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC) References
We are apesNo, we are definitely apes. There are two branches: the gibbons, or lesser apes (family Hylobatidae), and the great apes (family Hominidae), we belong to the Hominidae family. Richard Dawkins even produced a documentary series called "The Fifth Ape"(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8kTMxfpLng), and just in case you still haven't figured it out yet, the "fifth ape", that would be us, homo sapiens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undesignated (talk • contribs) 07:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
PrionHi, thanks for the thanks and for filling in the ref. One of the least understood things about prions/Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) is how they are transmitted. I thought this would clear up confusion for readers. I try to keep up to date on TSE Reasearch.Spidersmilk (talk) 03:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Tetra quark: Déjà vu?FYI: [1]. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 13:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC) April 2016
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2016 (UTC) A brownie for you!
Reference errors on 22 April
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) 00:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC) A Fan For You!
~~~~ Spidersmilk (talk) 18:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC) Unscrewed missionThat was a funny typo but I think you meant uncrewed. Brian Everlasting (talk) 18:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC) Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Criticism gaia hypothesisDear BatteryIncluded, Your recent reverts are not only non-constructive they seem to be the vestiges of WP:EW and at least not very civil. Especially your comment on my talk page accusing me of failing to make the distinction between 1, 2 and 3 below seems to be the latter. It is the articles Life, Earth system science and Gaia hypothesis that all fail to make sufficiently clear the distinction between 1. the initial purposeful idea and 2. later versions which had this removed and 3. the fallout this idea has caused in the wider geoscience community. This has to be corrected or the criticism by many scientists such as John Maynard Smith, Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Dawkins, Paul Ehrlich, Massimo Pigliucci and Robert May will simply seem random. Currently the main article doesn't even mention purposefulness until the very end of the article, in the criticism section. This cannot stand. I see that you have done great work elsewhere (it is always nice to meet a fellow Wikipedian on NPP), therefore I hope we can come to some sort of understanding regarding these pages. These articles (and others making mention of this idea) should at the very least be very specific about the distinction of 1, 2 and 3 and explain exactly what the criticism is about. The articles should all include mentions to both the benefits of 2 and 3 as well as the fact that 1 is pseudoscience. Reverting my edits before I can even get started on an article isn't going to make these problems go away and we all want an encyclopaedia that is as accurate as possible. Let's not let this devolve into petty squabbling over nothing. AlwaysUnite (talk) 19:14, 16 May 2016 (UTC) Have you looked at this article? I'm no biologist, but the article seems kind of unbalanced to me. Your thoughts? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 03:09, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
TksThanks for fixing the BEAM article. Sounds like the inflation is proceeding now, more slowly, but so far more successfully, as I write this. Scott P. (talk) 18:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community SurveyThe Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC) New article => "Human Genome Project - Write"?If interested, just created a new article => "Human Genome Project - Write" - about trying to artificially create the 3 billion DNA letters of the human genome[1][2] - *entirely* ok to contribute of course - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:00, 3 June 2016 (UTC) References
Please give some leeway>Protecting the atmosphere: Found their paper. Please cite sources when adding content. Thx. Please allow at least 15' (the academic quarter) for a user to amend her/his contribution after a notification. I was "conflicted" twice while correcting my section. Not all of us get it right first time. Thanks anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gk.Theodore (talk • contribs) 18:44, 7 June 2016 (UTC) possibly wrong edit you've madethis one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dark_matter&curid=8651&diff=730515772&oldid=730413634 Dark energy is massless, so, dark matter actually accounts for MUCH more than 27% of the mass content of the observable universe. EeeveeeFrost (talk) 17:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
IF Interested => "Last Universal Common Ancestor" (LUCA) of all "Life" on "Earth" Found?[1] Drbogdan (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
References
Reference errors on 28 July
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) 00:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC) A beer for you!
Disambiguation link notification for August 18Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pioneer program, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solar magnetic storm. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC) Reference errors on 28 August
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) 00:36, 29 August 2016 (UTC) MethanogenRedox is a contraction of "reduction–oxidation reaction", thus oxidize rightly redirects there. Kindly self-revert. 69.58.42.90 (talk) 17:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC) Thank you. 69.58.42.90 (talk) 21:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC) You've got mail! Message added 21:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 21:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
"Life on Mars" Search[1]NYT News - Re "Life on Mars", "Extremophiles" and more - Of possible interest?[1] => http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/science/south-african-mine-life-on-mars.html - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 01:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
References
Life at Earth.In my opinion, the Earth article gives very little attention to life on Earth. Mostly what is discussed are the physical aspects of our planet. Do you have an opinion on this? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 13:51, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Earth revertHi Battery, I see you reverted my edits to the Earth surface section. I suppose you felt my reduction of the discussion of surface processes was too much. I can possibly agree with you, but I still feel there is a lot of redundancy in this section, as well as other problems, like somewhat passive constructions (subject not appearing early in the sentences), etc. While this article is "featured", it still needs work. Please jump in. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 18:53, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
BiogenesisIP hopper also ar a couple of other articles, eg Creationism. Doug Weller talk 19:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC) Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1Hey BI. When you're not busy, would you mind giving a glance at Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1? I just created it, and would appreciate a sanity check on my writing. Thanks! — Huntster (t @ c) 07:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC) Discussion at Template talk:SpaceX#Category rethinking...
You've got mail!Message added 18:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. David J Johnson (talk) 18:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for October 5Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Discovery Program, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ceres, Vesta and Contour. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC) Invitation to comment on an RfDRaptor (rocket stage), an unfortunate rediret I created in the distant past when, for a short period of time, sources indicated Raptor was a rocket stage. Which was, it ended up, wrong. N2e (talk) 14:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC) (BTW, I also added a comment to one of our discussions on Interplanetary Transport System today. N2e (talk) 14:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC) Settlement thinkingHey Batt. A couple of your recent edits got me to thinking. Seeing you making a few edits, and using the word "settlement" is making me wonder about the common usage of the words "colony" and "colonization" with respect to the long-term objective of Musk's actions re the "Colonization" of Mars Both of the latter words imply a rather top-down approach, a bit of an us vs. them, an "in-charge" group and a "not-in-charge" group. From everything I see in Musk's 27 Sep IAC speech, and especially in the sn20161010 and ars20160928 sources I've used in a few places, Musk's vision for the growth of whatever comes on Mars is more bottom-up, encouraging others to consider how they might innovate and use the low-cost infrastructure SpaceX aims to build. In other words, more of a settlement, and less of a colony (in the long term. I say all this understanding that the initial smaller groups of humans would be much more guided/directed from the top, from whatever corporate or government entities that might have been involved in selecting and sending them.). But the long-term objective, as Musk is setting it up and pitching it, is much more of a grown order, a settlement, and less a colony. Or at least, that's what your recent edits got me to thinking. What do you think about this? N2e (talk) 01:37, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Maybe the 'Batteries weren't Included'.
RadioSorry battery, I read that source wrong about the electra radio. I thought it was saying the lander contacted the orbiter using its electra radio, but it was saying that it contacted the orbiter's electra radio. Thanks for checking my work, and good luck editing. Fotaun (talk) 17:56, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Here is where I made my mistake fwiw
With a link to a DAB page like Buccopharyngeal, the major options are:
Some of those options might be good, some might be bad - but above all, a direct link to a DAB page is against WP:INTDAB and annoys User:DPL bot, which is how I found that link while working my way through the 28,000-odd links flagged as errors by DPL bot in English Wiki. Narky Blert (talk) 01:22, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
New HorizonsThe policy is to only link to a page once per article. The subject matter of the section is not relevant. In fact, since the term was used and the abbreviation was noted, it isn't really necessary have anything more than RTG. - DinoSlider (talk) 14:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Please note that I reverted this edit because it was only slightly supported by the source cited. While I certainly feel the connection to big tobacco is worth mentioning, it is very important on a biography of a living person to be completely accurate. Thank you for your understanding. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:24, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
November 2016
 {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 22:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC)New deal for page patrollersHi Rowan Forest, In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created. Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work. Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC) RTGs and nuclear powerHi battery, as usual thanks for checking my work. In this case I don't care for the summary much either way, but I wanted to clarify that as far as I have read, RTG's are considered nuclear power. While I agree they are not a nuclear reactor, I have never found them not referred to as nuclear power. Further reading is easy to come by and here is one example https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/rps/rtg.cf Thanks again for your many articles, I felt like the space community really came together for the ExoMars landing, and with all the traffic I'm glad we had some people keeping an eye on it. Happy editing to you and all the best. Fotaun (talk) 15:49, 14 November 2016 (UTC) November 2016{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 13:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ Rob13Talk 07:43, 19 November 2016 (UTC)It is ABSOLUTE bullshit. I have no additional accounts, nor edited as IP. There are multiple users in Wikipedia that have described "global warming denial" as bulshit, and it is ridiculous that instead of looking at my server address (you have that info), you go instead by a single story by an editor that supports conspiracy theories. I like the Wikipedia concept, but when handled by assholes and science deniers, it is laughable. From the bottom of my heart: fuck you, the science deniers behind this, and your system that is incapable of looking at the address of the users in question. BatteryIncluded (talk) 20:13, 19 November 2016 (UTC) I haven't followed all of this in detail, but I do know that BatteryIncluded has done an awful lot of good editing on Wikipedia. Can a different administrator please check this socking allegation and confirm or not that the evidence is conclusive? Thank you. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 00:58, 20 November 2016 (UTC) Perhaps BatteryIncluded can request this him/herself? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
@BU Rob13, Jauerback, Ivanvector, and Isambard Kingdom: FWIW - Yes - *entirely* agree with the comments of "User:Isambard Kingdom" above re "User:BatteryIncluded" - don't know all the details either, but "User:BatteryIncluded" has been an excellent Wikipedia editor in my experience with him over the years - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:43, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! Hello, BatteryIncluded. 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) Turning over a new leafBatteryIncluded, I hope you can come back and return to making constructive edits to Wikipedia. I also hope you cool it with the derogatory language and name-calling. It only undermines your reputation and stance on issues (including those on which you are objectively "right"), and it can even allow someone else to drag you deeper into the mud. One thing is for certain, you have been passionate about your work here. So, I would like to encourage you to turn the leaf over. Moving forward, Isambard Kingdom (talk) 14:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC) Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyHello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[survey 1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyHello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now. If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again. About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC) Nomination of Earth Proxima for deletion A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Earth Proxima is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earth Proxima until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tarl N. (discuss) 03:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC) HiHi BatteryIncluded. I hope all is well. Feel free to drop me a message if you need anything. I learned a lot from you and would love to hear what you're up to and what projects you have in mind here at WP. Un abrazo, ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC) Gravitational waveI'm sorry for reverting your edit in this article instead of simply editing, which would have been more appropriate. Thanks for spotting that mistake. Gap9551 (talk) 21:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC) Space barnstar
Thank you! -BatteryIncluded (talk) 23:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC) Flagship programMaybe the article "Flagship program" needs to be modified or deleted. Unlike explorer, discovery or new frontier, the so-called "program" never exists in NASA annual budget estimates documents. PSR B1937+21 (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC) Reference errors on 29 February
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) 00:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC) Should the current artist's impression be removed from the Planet Nine infobox?You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Regards, nagualdesign 15:02, 11 March 2016 (UTC) NASA Briefings/livestream (March 21 – 22, 2016) – Ceres, Mars, Pluto Results.NASA Briefings/livestream – Experts to discuss the latest Ceres, Mars, Pluto results (near Houston, TX; March 21 – 22, 2016)[1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:37, 17 March 2016 (UTC) References
We are apesNo, we are definitely apes. There are two branches: the gibbons, or lesser apes (family Hylobatidae), and the great apes (family Hominidae), we belong to the Hominidae family. Richard Dawkins even produced a documentary series called "The Fifth Ape"(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8kTMxfpLng), and just in case you still haven't figured it out yet, the "fifth ape", that would be us, homo sapiens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undesignated (talk • contribs) 07:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
PrionHi, thanks for the thanks and for filling in the ref. One of the least understood things about prions/Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) is how they are transmitted. I thought this would clear up confusion for readers. I try to keep up to date on TSE Reasearch.Spidersmilk (talk) 03:44, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Tetra quark: Déjà vu?FYI: [4]. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 13:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC) April 2016
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2016 (UTC) A brownie for you!
Reference errors on 22 April
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) 00:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC) A Fan For You!
~~~~ Spidersmilk (talk) 18:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC) Unscrewed missionThat was a funny typo but I think you meant uncrewed. Brian Everlasting (talk) 18:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC) Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Criticism gaia hypothesisDear BatteryIncluded, Your recent reverts are not only non-constructive they seem to be the vestiges of WP:EW and at least not very civil. Especially your comment on my talk page accusing me of failing to make the distinction between 1, 2 and 3 below seems to be the latter. It is the articles Life, Earth system science and Gaia hypothesis that all fail to make sufficiently clear the distinction between 1. the initial purposeful idea and 2. later versions which had this removed and 3. the fallout this idea has caused in the wider geoscience community. This has to be corrected or the criticism by many scientists such as John Maynard Smith, Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Dawkins, Paul Ehrlich, Massimo Pigliucci and Robert May will simply seem random. Currently the main article doesn't even mention purposefulness until the very end of the article, in the criticism section. This cannot stand. I see that you have done great work elsewhere (it is always nice to meet a fellow Wikipedian on NPP), therefore I hope we can come to some sort of understanding regarding these pages. These articles (and others making mention of this idea) should at the very least be very specific about the distinction of 1, 2 and 3 and explain exactly what the criticism is about. The articles should all include mentions to both the benefits of 2 and 3 as well as the fact that 1 is pseudoscience. Reverting my edits before I can even get started on an article isn't going to make these problems go away and we all want an encyclopaedia that is as accurate as possible. Let's not let this devolve into petty squabbling over nothing. AlwaysUnite (talk) 19:14, 16 May 2016 (UTC) Have you looked at this article? I'm no biologist, but the article seems kind of unbalanced to me. Your thoughts? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 03:09, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
TksThanks for fixing the BEAM article. Sounds like the inflation is proceeding now, more slowly, but so far more successfully, as I write this. Scott P. (talk) 18:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community SurveyThe Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC) New article => "Human Genome Project - Write"?If interested, just created a new article => "Human Genome Project - Write" - about trying to artificially create the 3 billion DNA letters of the human genome[1][2] - *entirely* ok to contribute of course - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 16:00, 3 June 2016 (UTC) References
Please give some leeway>Protecting the atmosphere: Found their paper. Please cite sources when adding content. Thx. Please allow at least 15' (the academic quarter) for a user to amend her/his contribution after a notification. I was "conflicted" twice while correcting my section. Not all of us get it right first time. Thanks anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gk.Theodore (talk • contribs) 18:44, 7 June 2016 (UTC) possibly wrong edit you've madethis one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dark_matter&curid=8651&diff=730515772&oldid=730413634 Dark energy is massless, so, dark matter actually accounts for MUCH more than 27% of the mass content of the observable universe. EeeveeeFrost (talk) 17:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
IF Interested => "Last Universal Common Ancestor" (LUCA) of all "Life" on "Earth" Found?[1] Drbogdan (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
References
Reference errors on 28 July
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) 00:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC) A beer for you!
Disambiguation link notification for August 18Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pioneer program, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solar magnetic storm. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC) Reference errors on 28 August
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) 00:36, 29 August 2016 (UTC) MethanogenRedox is a contraction of "reduction–oxidation reaction", thus oxidize rightly redirects there. Kindly self-revert. 69.58.42.90 (talk) 17:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC) Thank you. 69.58.42.90 (talk) 21:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC) You've got mail!Message added 21:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 21:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
"Life on Mars" Search[1]NYT News - Re "Life on Mars", "Extremophiles" and more - Of possible interest?[1] => http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/science/south-african-mine-life-on-mars.html - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 01:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
References
Life at Earth.In my opinion, the Earth article gives very little attention to life on Earth. Mostly what is discussed are the physical aspects of our planet. Do you have an opinion on this? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 13:51, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Earth revertHi Battery, I see you reverted my edits to the Earth surface section. I suppose you felt my reduction of the discussion of surface processes was too much. I can possibly agree with you, but I still feel there is a lot of redundancy in this section, as well as other problems, like somewhat passive constructions (subject not appearing early in the sentences), etc. While this article is "featured", it still needs work. Please jump in. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 18:53, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
BiogenesisIP hopper also ar a couple of other articles, eg Creationism. Doug Weller talk 19:24, 26 September 2016 (UTC) Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1Hey BI. When you're not busy, would you mind giving a glance at Rocket Lab Launch Complex 1? I just created it, and would appreciate a sanity check on my writing. Thanks! — Huntster (t @ c) 07:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC) Discussion at Template talk:SpaceX#Category rethinking...
You've got mail!Message added 18:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. David J Johnson (talk) 18:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for October 5Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Discovery Program, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ceres, Vesta and Contour. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC) Invitation to comment on an RfDRaptor (rocket stage), an unfortunate rediret I created in the distant past when, for a short period of time, sources indicated Raptor was a rocket stage. Which was, it ended up, wrong. N2e (talk) 14:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC) (BTW, I also added a comment to one of our discussions on Interplanetary Transport System today. N2e (talk) 14:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC) Settlement thinkingHey Batt. A couple of your recent edits got me to thinking. Seeing you making a few edits, and using the word "settlement" is making me wonder about the common usage of the words "colony" and "colonization" with respect to the long-term objective of Musk's actions re the "Colonization" of Mars Both of the latter words imply a rather top-down approach, a bit of an us vs. them, an "in-charge" group and a "not-in-charge" group. From everything I see in Musk's 27 Sep IAC speech, and especially in the sn20161010 and ars20160928 sources I've used in a few places, Musk's vision for the growth of whatever comes on Mars is more bottom-up, encouraging others to consider how they might innovate and use the low-cost infrastructure SpaceX aims to build. In other words, more of a settlement, and less of a colony (in the long term. I say all this understanding that the initial smaller groups of humans would be much more guided/directed from the top, from whatever corporate or government entities that might have been involved in selecting and sending them.). But the long-term objective, as Musk is setting it up and pitching it, is much more of a grown order, a settlement, and less a colony. Or at least, that's what your recent edits got me to thinking. What do you think about this? N2e (talk) 01:37, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Maybe the 'Batteries weren't Included'.
RadioSorry battery, I read that source wrong about the electra radio. I thought it was saying the lander contacted the orbiter using its electra radio, but it was saying that it contacted the orbiter's electra radio. Thanks for checking my work, and good luck editing. Fotaun (talk) 17:56, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Here is where I made my mistake fwiw
With a link to a DAB page like Buccopharyngeal, the major options are:
Some of those options might be good, some might be bad - but above all, a direct link to a DAB page is against WP:INTDAB and annoys User:DPL bot, which is how I found that link while working my way through the 28,000-odd links flagged as errors by DPL bot in English Wiki. Narky Blert (talk) 01:22, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
New HorizonsThe policy is to only link to a page once per article. The subject matter of the section is not relevant. In fact, since the term was used and the abbreviation was noted, it isn't really necessary have anything more than RTG. - DinoSlider (talk) 14:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Please note that I reverted this edit because it was only slightly supported by the source cited. While I certainly feel the connection to big tobacco is worth mentioning, it is very important on a biography of a living person to be completely accurate. Thank you for your understanding. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:24, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
November 2016
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 22:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC)New deal for page patrollersHi Rowan Forest, In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created. Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work. Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC) RTGs and nuclear powerHi battery, as usual thanks for checking my work. In this case I don't care for the summary much either way, but I wanted to clarify that as far as I have read, RTG's are considered nuclear power. While I agree they are not a nuclear reactor, I have never found them not referred to as nuclear power. Further reading is easy to come by and here is one example https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/rps/rtg.cf Thanks again for your many articles, I felt like the space community really came together for the ExoMars landing, and with all the traffic I'm glad we had some people keeping an eye on it. Happy editing to you and all the best. Fotaun (talk) 15:49, 14 November 2016 (UTC) November 2016{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 13:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ Rob13Talk 07:43, 19 November 2016 (UTC)It is ABSOLUTE bullshit. I have no additional accounts, nor edited as IP. There are multiple users in Wikipedia that have described "global warming denial" as bulshit, and it is ridiculous that instead of looking at my server address (you have that info), you go instead by a single story by an editor that supports conspiracy theories. I like the Wikipedia concept, but when handled by assholes and science deniers, it is laughable. From the bottom of my heart: fuck you, the science deniers behind this, and your system that is incapable of looking at the address of the users in question. BatteryIncluded (talk) 20:13, 19 November 2016 (UTC) I haven't followed all of this in detail, but I do know that BatteryIncluded has done an awful lot of good editing on Wikipedia. Can a different administrator please check this socking allegation and confirm or not that the evidence is conclusive? Thank you. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 00:58, 20 November 2016 (UTC) Perhaps BatteryIncluded can request this him/herself? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
@BU Rob13, Jauerback, Ivanvector, and Isambard Kingdom: FWIW - Yes - *entirely* agree with the comments of "User:Isambard Kingdom" above re "User:BatteryIncluded" - don't know all the details either, but "User:BatteryIncluded" has been an excellent Wikipedia editor in my experience with him over the years - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:43, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Hello, BatteryIncluded. 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) Turning over a new leafBatteryIncluded, I hope you can come back and return to making constructive edits to Wikipedia. I also hope you cool it with the derogatory language and name-calling. It only undermines your reputation and stance on issues (including those on which you are objectively "right"), and it can even allow someone else to drag you deeper into the mud. One thing is for certain, you have been passionate about your work here. So, I would like to encourage you to turn the leaf over. Moving forward, Isambard Kingdom (talk) 14:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC) Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyHello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[survey 1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyHello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now. If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again. About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC) Nomination of Earth Proxima for deletionA discussion is taking place as to whether the article Earth Proxima is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earth Proxima until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tarl N. (discuss) 03:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC) HiHi BatteryIncluded. I hope all is well. Feel free to drop me a message if you need anything. I learned a lot from you and would love to hear what you're up to and what projects you have in mind here at WP. Un abrazo, ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
|
