User talk:DMacks/Archive 43

Latest comment: 4 years ago by DMacks in topic DS notice?
Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45Archive 50

DPPC

Hello,

We are students making a chemistry paper for university and we would like to know why you deleted the image of DPPC we uploaded. Given that our biochemistry teacher told us it was alright, we would appreciate it if you gave us some advice about what you think is not correct to modify it.


Thank you,


BQUB19-MChaves (talk) 19:02, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm the second editor to tell you that your image(s) have incorrect geometry in a 3D sense. While it is easy to draw an "atoms as spheres" equivalent to a skeletal diagram, that implies an actual 3D nature and molecular geometry, not just which atoms are bonded to which. The way skeletal diagrams are usually drawn is often not correct atomic geometry for our real 3D world. The most salient mistakes are that the phosphorus and oxygen atoms were flat. It's like the difference between decorating a cake by drawing a face with icing: the icing is raised compared to the cake but is not really a 3D face unless the nose actually sticks way off the surface rather than being drawn as a triangle. DMacks (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

DPPC pt. 2

Hi, I'm one of the integrants of the group which is editing the DPPC entry. This is a project we are doing for our biochemistry classes in college. Our final grade depends on this project and the fact that we upload an original image of the molecule (or a related process). We elaborated this image folllowing the skeletal formula of DPPC, and we undestrand its spacial distribution was not totally correct. But then we changed the image and turnt it into a 2D image to avoid this imprecisions, so we could have an image of the skeletal molecule but in a diferent (more didactic maybe) way. So, if we specify that the image does not represent the 3d structure, the problem would be solved right? We are quite concerned about this issue because, as I said before, our final grades depend on this. We would be really thankfull if you could help us fix the mistakes in the image and make it correct because we need to upload one original picture at least. Thank you for your undestranding, we are looking forward to receive your response.BQUB19-LCasas (talk) 18:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

We cannot accept a "3D-appearing representation of a 2D diagram", because that falsely implies there is 3D detail. Others might see it and think it actually is 3D. We're an encyclopedia here, first and foremost, so it's unfortunate but fairly not relevant, that you are being graded on doing something that might be beyond your ability or against our rules. Maybe you should choose some other aspect to illustrate than the molecule itself, since we already have that aspect of the topic illustrated? DMacks (talk) 15:28, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

16:47, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Solvent effects, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intramolecular (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:30, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail

 
Hello, DMacks. 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. Doug Weller talk 12:49, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

DMacks, for continuing to look in on the Burgi-Dunitz and Flippin-Lodge articles. You are a good chemist, communicator, and mate. 67.167.8.141 (talk) 03:25, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, random stranger! DMacks (talk) 03:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

22:03, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Changes to English Democrats Description

Dear Dmacks

With regards to the above, you have changed my edits. Please stop. The English Democrats are NOT a Right Wing Party and I am sick of people altering my edits. What is your evidence they are? I got it from the source which you can't beat.

Very kindly stop the changes.

Kind regards

Philster 1972 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philster1972 (talkcontribs) 02:24, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

What the group says themselves is WP:PRIMARY and therefore fairly irrelevant for an encyclopedia. Instead, the wikipedia content policy mandates that we use WP:SECONDARY--what independent reliable sources have published. Several of us have told you that, and has been discussed extensively on Talk:English Democrats (per WP:DR policy). If you continue to edit war against consensus and fail to cite reliable sources, you'll just lose your ability to edit altogether. DMacks (talk) 02:54, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Ducks

Hi DMacks, can you please block OfficialAnkitSaroha and Ankitgolu04? They're ducks. See c:COM:ANU#Same_person. 大诺史 (talk) 11:36, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

  Done Thanks for the heads-up. DMacks (talk) 13:48, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

why?

where does the content(which you deleted) belong then? It is a form of mis-information to stress the law of thermodynamics because this argument has its limitations when regenerative braking and battery power is added into the equation— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nullyoa (talkcontribs) 10:09, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

It might or might not belong anywhere, especially being a WP:PRIMARY research. Given multiple editors have disputed adding it in various places, the solution is not to keep trying to add it. There is the appearance that your goal here is to promote this idea at all costs (WP:SPAM), regardless of its actual value to our encyclopedia. DMacks (talk) 11:53, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

<nullyoa>: Well I am trying to promote the idea because I think there is a potential benefit that could be gained from it (because an encyclopedia should explain how things work) and because there were definitely some misconceptions which I have been able to address. I have written plausible explanations and applications which deserve the attention of other editors because they do have actual value to the encyclopedia. I'll let the other editors decide what to do with the stuff I posted in the "talk" section. Feel free to correct any possible mistakes I may have made. I have contributed as much as I could. </nullyoa>

Sorry, but wikipedia is only for things that are already established in WP:RS, not for WP:SYNTH or proposals of your own design. DMacks (talk) 13:52, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

<nullyoa>: are these sources acceptable/reliable? https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214785318329675 http://www.ijirset.com/upload/2016/october/92_EFFECT.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314154058_A_Review_on_the_Application_of_Hydrogen_Rich_Gas_as_Fuel_Supplement_in_CI_and_SI_Internal_Combustion_Engine https://www.ijresm.com/Vol_1_2018/Vol1_Iss11_November18/IJRESM_V1_I11_102.pdf </nullyoa>

20:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

 Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Thanks User:CAPTAIN RAJU! If you (or anyone) is able to tell me why I signed up for this crap, please let me know:) DMacks (talk) 06:33, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Not WP:EL Worthy

Not sure why you rolled back my link to the Instructrable for making your own CARDIAC. I would think that anyone interested in this topic might in fact be interested in making one of their own.

Megardi (talk) 20:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Megardi (talkcontribs) 20:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

That's possibly true, but Wikipedia isn't a directory of other websites. And it's also not a how-to guide, so that sort of content wouldn't be welcome here either, which means it fails the external-links standard. Because instructables is just a site where anyone can upload their own content with no oversight or refereeing, it's of uncertain encyclopediac quality also. DMacks (talk) 22:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

16:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

This Month in Education: November 2019

This Month in Education

Volume 8 • Issue 11 • November 2019


ContentsHeadlinesSubscribe


In This Issue

16:58, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Piracetam

The sock has just written "you can go fuck yourself"[9] on my Talk page (among other things). Never mind, the editor got indef'd. Alexbrn (talk) 16:42, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

As long as the laundry got washed, we're all set. Thanks for bringing the problem to everyone's attention. DMacks (talk) 17:36, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

"Natural Selection (disambiguation)" should not have uppercase "S", should it

I see you just changed the hat on "Natural selection" to the above. That may be where the dab page is now, but it's actually wrongly named, n'est-ce-pas? The hat was actually correctly formed, not its fault the dab page is up the shoot. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:48, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

That would have been my initial thought also. But although Natural selection (lowercase "s") is the PRIMARYTOPIC, every other entry on Natural Selection (disambiguation) is with capital "S". So I think that DAB page is correctly capitalized, because it really does (and only) disamgiguates among meanings with that case. And so I think it's correct to point to it with that case also, since we don't have any other meanings with lowercase "s". DMacks (talk) 15:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

RD/S goof?

Thanks for catching that and fixing it. I don't know what went wrong there. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots08:40, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Reversion of edit

Why did you reverse my edit to the chemical reactivity? Is there a reason for doing so if so, could you explain? UB Blacephalon (talk) 06:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

As I wrote in my edit summary, "variously redundant and off-topic". Edit summaries are a good way to communicate with other editors. You might want to start using them yourself, so others can likewise see at a glance some information about each change you make. DMacks (talk) 06:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Oh thanks! While you're not wrong, Isn't what I wrote true? Atomic numbers do get heavier as they go down so they should have the same chemical reactions, right? UB Blacephalon (talk) 06:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
It's true that going down a column gives increasing mass (assuming you mean "of the stable isotopes":). But some chemical reactions are highly sensitive to mass. The decreasing electronegativity can also have a substantial effect. The simple idea of "valence electron count" is a good approximation at best. Consider AgI is soluble in acetone but AgCl is not; sulfur has lots of somewhat stable ring allotropes but oxygen does not; HI is acidic but LiI is not; SiF62– is stable but exceeding the octet on carbon is pure fantasy. DMacks (talk) 09:54, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
I mean you're not wrong. I wanna major in chemistry since im still in high school, and what i'm learning in chemistry class that relates to this is that, let's take the alkali elements for example, while H isn't really in that group, if we do count it, its valence electrons are the same as say francium. Ununennium would then be the same way as it to would have only one electron. And if the chemical reactivity of them are different, what makes them in a group? UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
I'm confused.... UB Blacephalon (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

16:38, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Good catch!

Good catch with this. I got some of the Hero/Heroine stuff, but missed the one you caught. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:08, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Solubility equilibrium

For information: I have put a note on the user's talk page indicating that the recement edits are off-topic and have asked the user to remove them. If that is not done in a reasonable time I will delete them myself. I have also informed the user that the right topic concerning the issues covered in the recent edits is gravimetric analysis. Petergans (talk) 20:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

00:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Salvador A. Alcazaren III

This page is created again by another user. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 05:48, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@CAPTAIN MEDUSA: thanks for the heads-up. And now deleted again, and both editors blocked for puppetry among other problems. DMacks (talk) 05:53, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
DMacks, Thanks. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 05:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Incandescent light Bulb

Hello DMacks. The way I read it, the filament is still "within" the glass bulb. (The filament is protected from oxidation with a glass or fused quartz bulb) The way it's written reads as if it is with a glass bulb, not inside one. I had to read it a couple of times to realize surely the filament is within ! I'll let you cogitate on it. Avi8tor (talk) 17:38, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

@Avi8tor: I agree it's an odd wording. How about "...filament is protected from oxidation by being enclosed in..." or "...filament is enclosed in...in order to protect it from oxidation"? DMacks (talk) 17:50, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Sounds good, at least it makes more sense. Avi8tor (talk) 15:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
  Done DMacks (talk) 17:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hydrogen peroxide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mortality (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

20:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Solution, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Physical (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Santa Claus

Santa Claus is a legendary figure, not fictional character

I would like to inform you that Santa Claus is officially a legendary figure. You've been told ond time, so if you changes "legendary" to "fictional" in the page of him, I will be angry, grrrrrrrrrr. TAKE THAT PUNCH YOU BIG DUMB/MONSTER, THIS IS NOT TRUE ABOUT SANTA BEING FICTIONAL. 👊👊👊👊👊👊👊👊😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gugaantony (talkcontribs) 00:22, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

At wikipedia, you can participate on our site's terms with regards to behavior, or not at all. Right now, you are headed towards getting blocked, which means you won't get to have your opinion considered at all...probably not the best course of action. DMacks (talk) 01:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Vulpinic acid article

I gave this article, of earlier interest to you, a once-over. Please feel free to give it further attention. I have tried to address a variety of issues, most particularly the lack of sourcing for the claims appearing therein. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:19D:C080:BE9E:A459:DF24 (talk) 04:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of PianoManFolkRock

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of PianoManFolkRock requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 12:38, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

21:20, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Catholic Memorial High School Protected

Hi DMacks:

I am trying to fix Catholic Memorial High School's page. I see you're protecting the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Memorial_High_School. I am trying to put in a NPOV dispute.

Mordalf (talk) 17:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)Mordalf

Section tagged. DMacks (talk) 18:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 
Hello, DMacks. 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.

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Kekulene (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Vinyl
Schlieren photography (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Intensity

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Removing Controversies to comply with Wikipedia School Project Article

Dear DMacks, Thank you for reviewing my edits. Can you please help me to remove controversies as per The Article Guidelines at the Wikipedia School project from the VIBGYOR Group of Schools wiki page. Rahul2sawant (talk) 05:41, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I see nothing in that guideline that would require wholesale removal of that article section. At least the Bangalore rape incident had wide-ranging implications and media coverage for the public and for the chain of schools. And I will make this very sharp: until you declare your COI relationship to this school chain, you are not permitted to be involved at all (therefore I reject out-of-hand all attempts for you to get me to edit on your behalf). DMacks (talk) 17:03, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect info in article.

All 4 of Joel’s grandparents were of “ashkenazi jewish descent” not English descent! therefore you should not say he is of English descent! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.226.21.114 (talk) 03:00, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Ashkenazi is not a modern-day nationality. Our article says (with a seemingly WP:RS cite), "Joel's mother, Rosalind, was born in Brooklyn, New York City, to Jewish parents, Philip and Rebecca Nyman, who had immigrated from England." DMacks (talk) 15:52, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
"English–Jewish" looks fine. DMacks (talk) 15:56, 11 January 2020 (UTC)


Not to be mean but none of his grandparents were English which is why I am glad to say I changed it so many times. Also to say “Ashkenazi” is not a modern day ethnicity is nonsense. I will give you two links that prove it

https://ethnicelebs.com/billy-joel

https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/a4pt15/my_dad_is_998_ashkenazi_jewish/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.226.21.114 (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

You are continuing to mix the separate ideas of "nationality" with "ethnicity" (note the parts of my and your comments I underlined--it is an ethnicity). Both of his mother's parents came from England, and at least one of them was from a long-established family there. DMacks (talk) 16:55, 11 January 2020 (UTC)


Actually the word descent usually refers to a persons ancestry which would be ethnicity NOT nationality!!!!! Oh my goodness.

Again, per cited ref, one of his grandparents is from an estanblished Kent family. DMacks (talk) 17:00, 11 January 2020 (UTC)


Well, since (to you) the word descent refers to nationality, and to me the word descent refers to ethnicity I think we should just leave it as “English jewish” . But in my personal opinion “American people of Jewish descent” would have been better...

Our ...descent catagories are explicitly both ethnicity and nationality, not just ethnicity. The top-level cat is Category:People by region of descent. DMacks (talk) 17:07, 11 January 2020 (UTC)


Neither of his mother’s parents were “long established in England” they were both Jewish immigrants to England but I guess you don’t care about that since you don’t agree on what the word “descent” means..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.226.21.114 (talk) 17:10, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm following what the category is claimed to represent, regardless of what I think about the meaning of the word. I actualyl don't know how "long-established", I'm again merely reading what our article says, as supported by cites. Feel free to ask for additional opinions at WP:BLP. DMacks (talk) 17:15, 11 January 2020 (UTC)


Well then you and me will have to agree to TOTALLY disagree and let’s leave it at that.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.226.21.114 (talk) 17:17, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Tsuji thing

Thanks for the thanks. I am trying, periodically, to grind through the various tagged pages per https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Chemistry.html. If you see edits where I might get too aggressive or flakey, let me know.--Smokefoot (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Camille Rowe

I accept your adjustment on the aforementioned article as the source did not include the full birth date. I will however be adding the CORRECTED information back in with the legitimate source for this information clearly cited and referenced, as January 1986. This source is valid and is the official register of companies in the United Kingdom (the source is a UK Government website). In future, please do not threaten me with being blocked from editing for just making a simple error. Your demeanour is frankly inappropriate and I will not tolerate it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownely2222 (talkcontribs) 22:05, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for adding cited content to our article, though it did take you a year of increasingly strident warnings to limit your contribution to what the cite actually supports. DMacks (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-03

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:39, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Deletion of Mahdis Golzarkashani

Hi, My article has been deleted due to copy right violations. I was wondering if I can change the sentences that might be too close to the original text and then publish the article again? I will further change the order of the text as well as the choice of words. Thank you Fatemeh Naghshvarian (talk) 13:35, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

You have to actually write it from scratch, not make successive tweaks from the original. A close paraphrase or changing wording here and there is not allowable (Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing policy explanation). DMacks (talk) 13:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

  Thank you for keeping a watch on articles and keeping vandalism at bay. DBigXray 16:25, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Yum! Thanks DBigXray! DMacks (talk) 17:09, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Why delete activities?

Hi, I wanted to know why you deleted my edit of all the club/organizations on the Owings Mills High page. I'm a current student there and I know about all the club and organizations that are current or are inactive — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatchin820 (talkcontribs) 18:20, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Hatchin820: I'm glad someone with current information is updating the page! However, two problems. One, wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that information be cited, not just relying on claimed credibility of some random internet account. For example, does the school or SGA have a website listing the current clubs? The AP-courses and sports championships have the same problem. As a specific example, your earlier edit actually broke what was a cited fact and made it rather incorrect (the success of the mock trial team--see my followup correction). Second, the content was written in an inappropriate WP:TONE ("and many more" sounds like breathless promotion). Feel free to re-add content with a citation to a suitable source (see the Students section for an example of content that is traceable to cited refs). DMacks (talk) 18:35, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Appreciate It :)

Hey dude, thanks for your feedback. I'm still new to editing here on Wikipedia so I did end up adding citations to the school's info page. Someone by the name of "John from Idegon" keeps deleting a lot of my editing though and I wanted to know if you could check it out and to see if his reasoning for editing the page is reasonable, appreciate it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatchin820 (talkcontribs) 18:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

19:41, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of StuRat

 

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of StuRat requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Iraqna

 

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Iraqna requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:28, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi

I see you are bot. Jfbongarçon (talk) 10:01, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

I don’t believe you are a real human acting in human intelligence. My edits are immediately undone. Jfbongarçon (talk) 10:05, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

That’s too quick to be human. You can’t possibly be up at every hour. Jfbongarçon (talk) 10:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is therefore dead to me now that bots control the info. Jfbongarçon (talk) 10:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

ERR: USER UNABLE TO FOLLOW CONTENT POLICY. BLOCK MODE QUEUED. DMacks (talk) 10:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
LMAO! Priceless. -- BullRangifer (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Your notice to IP editor

Thanks for your notice to IP 144.136.140.154. That editor appears to be continuing disruptive editing and covering it up by blanking his Talk page, where you and others have tried to notify him. Currently he is reverting cited edits on the film article for The Gentlemen (2020). Could you look at this? CodexJustin (talk) 16:50, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. Blocked 31h. DMacks (talk) 18:44, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for doing that block which worked for its time span. The same IP-editor is now back at making his reverts over again and is now branching out to the film page for RockNRolla (another film by the same director). I'm not sure that the IP-editor is getting the messages being left for him. CodexJustin (talk) 16:40, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Blocked 3 months. DMacks (talk) 17:27, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Kyiv is not an abstract word because the city is named after Kyi

The city's name is said to derive from the name of Kyi, one of its four legendary founders (source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiev). Kyiv not Kiev. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmk0704 (talkcontribs) 18:17, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

We as wikipedia editors are completely forbidden from making our own analysis. See talkpage of the article, where it is clear that this is not even an acceptable discussion for now. DMacks (talk) 18:20, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

18:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

  Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Jfbongarçon (talk) 07:40, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if you can put my draft on Alireza Farhang back in my sandbox. I was working on the content and wanted to change it completely before publishing. Thank you Regards Fatemeh Naghshvarian (talk) 15:44, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

DS notice?

I wonder if it would be good to put a DS notice on Talk:MMR vaccine and autism, and then hand out topic bans when necessary? Context. Also. -- BullRangifer (talk) 01:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Thanks User:Doug Weller for handling it! DMacks (talk) 03:27, 2 February 2020 (UTC)