User talk:DMacks/Archive 53

Archive 50Archive 51Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54Archive 55Archive 60

Tech News: 2022-16

23:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Based on prior attention...

You might have a look at the Mike Jeffries (CEO) article. I came for background on a new documentary, and found the article rife with issues—unsourced content, misused citations with regard to their placements, etc. As well, the lead does not summarise the article. Perhaps have a look, and accept the changes of which you approve. (Almost all of the hours long effort was in completing, correcting, and checking citations.) Cheers. 2601:246:C700:558:6853:5342:5B5F:1D80 (talk) 17:37, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Glycidyl ethers

Thanks for all your work cleaning up the articles. BTW I have now written another one - Castor oil glycidyl ether GRALISTAIR (talk) 14:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Great! This is how to add its entry to the navbox. This is how to use the navbox footer instead of individual SEEALSO links. DMacks (talk) 23:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Just a little number joke.

Convert it from binary of course! A person acting in a non-official duty to ban a number from their facebook page doesn't really seem due is all. Pabsoluterince (talk) 07:10, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Sounds like a good thing to discuss on the talk-page. It's cited, so at least on its face there is some independent (?) reporting on it. Maybe that it's too trivial compared to the other examples? Or that it doesn't fit the actual scope/term-definition of the article? DMacks (talk) 07:13, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
My argument is the latter. Pabsoluterince (talk) 07:49, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
I'll agree with that. Thanks for clarifying! DMacks (talk) 21:30, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

This Month in Education: April 2022

Regarding Disruptive Editing

im sorry it isnt meant advertising, do you have ideas what page i should upload helpful stuff to add it to thematical relevant wikipedia pages? i dont think direct paste inside the articles would be helpful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llarryyllarryy (talkcontribs) 22:48, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

You should not add your blog (or any other hosting site you might use) to any article anywhere on wikipedia. DMacks (talk) 22:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Afghanistanis ethno-lingustic map

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources I had an arguement with user history of iran about Al-Jazeera now you can see according to wikipedia Standars Al-Jazeera is Trustful 5644Khorasani (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Repeating the same edit and adding more explanations in the edit-summary is not a substitute for an actual discussion. That doesn't mean your position isn't right, or that your edit might eventually be okay, but you need to be polite about it and let others give their thoughts before plunging ahead on your own. DMacks (talk) 20:50, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

At first he asked me to prove Al-Jazeera (my source) is a reliable source then i proved to him you can also see that.this done. 5644Khorasani (talk) 03:38, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't undrastand why you deleted my map?? What's your resean, we were Talking about my source's reliablity.i don't undrastand your attitude towards my edit!!! No need for deleting my edit 5644Khorasani (talk) 06:30, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

You appear to be edit-warring, and I am acting as an admin to stop that behavior from escallating. I am not commenting on whether your idea or map is good. You don't need to convince me that your map is "right" or that your source is "good". But you need to work with other editors to get it accomplished...they currently seem to disagree with you. DMacks (talk) 10:07, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

I still don't undrastand why did you delete my map!! 5644Khorasani (talk) 13:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

And he reverted again (WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT). The original map in the article was by the CIA, which 5644Khorasani was quick to dismiss [6]. He has also done a lot of similar edits on his other account ([7]). I opened a WP:RSN [8] --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-17

22:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

malicious editing and unreliable sources

Dear DMacks, as an Academic as you announce yourself on your user page, it's highly surprising that you promote quotes from unreliable sources use to defame, slander a living person. Note that slandering and defaming is not an appropriate thing to do, especially when you are aware as an editor that such action is not permitted in the wiki community, therefore I would kindly request you to explain here the reason you did it, knowing that repeating defamations and slanders even on a talk page is clearly a way to still damage someone's reputation. I noticed that on the 11th of January 2022, you edit highly serious slanders and lies, of unreliable sources on the main page of the living person, your intention remain unclear why should you do such editing or what is your gain to do such action knowing that your editing has no reliable source, it is clearly made with the intent to defame and spread lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB00:553:7C00:4CC8:1F08:898D:D3A3 (talk) 07:54, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

At the time, there was no claim made that it was an unreliable source. After that time, someone explained that, and the content was promptly removed. Conversely, your personal attack and incivility here, as well as guessing at my intent, as well as repeated violations of talk-page guidelines, are noted. You will be blocked if you continue. DMacks (talk) 08:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-18

19:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-19

15:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration


,,

Ccf 5644Khorasani (talk) 04:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

New York (State)

Spread of infections via population density

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7418640/ "Also, the population, population density of the provinces, and average air pollution data were taken. The findings of the study showed that population density and wind were effective in spreading the virus and both factors explained for 94% of the variance in virus spreading."

I don't have revision wars on Wikipedia. Obviously, I didnt cite the claim that population density helps to increase the spread of infectious diseases. It's all over medical literature, and is a pretty given fact much like how the earth is round is a basic given fact. My concern with adding that element to the page, stems from my concern that these days, facts have become overly political and "opinionated." The fact that New York City (and therefore, the state of New York) had such a high infection rate, has been weaponized by right wing media; completely ignoring two basic facts:

That it's the largest and most dense city in the US, and second in North America to only Mexico City.

And that population size and density is a major factor in the spread of infectious diseases.

Both of those are very basic given facts that I strongly believe should be emphasized in order to balance out the fact given that the city and the state of NY had the highest rate of infection in the country. So as to help to mitigate facts being politically weaponized.

I probably went about it the wrong way. As you can see if you care to look at my history, I'm not a proficient Wiki editor. I mostly make minor corrections to spelling and grammar.


Does make sense to move the flag issue to own para, but everything in the history sections is by event/topic not by year-range, so it's the COVID Era not "some years, in which COVID happened to have happened".

That's why I changed the title to "2020 - Present," in order to remain consistent with the rest of the "History" section.

The fact that "COVID Era" had it's own section, and the fact that the flag being changed (a thing right wing media went bonkers over for like a week) was under that section, combined with the omission of the basic facts I argued for above, strongly suggests that this COVID section is highly politically motivated. That was the first reason why I edited the title and separated the flag issue.

The other red flag of this section in my mind, is the fact that it was entirely inconsistent with the rest of the history section. You are incorrect when you said it is by topic, not by year-range. Look at all the other subheadings above "Recent History." It's century-by-century. The "Recent History" should probably lose the "Sub-sub" categorical sections, and just read in paragraph form like the it does for the "Native American," "16th Century," "17th Century," "18th Century...." etc does. The reason being:

When you make a specific categorical subject heading, like "COVID" and include the specified year "2020 - Present," and you have another minor event of interest that is markedly less important, like the flag change; you can't create the "Flag Change" as it's own section, because it would just simply be just one or two sentences, and is not a big important enough of a topic to really have its own section. And it's weird and awkward to include it in the "COVID section.

Basically, what I'm saying, is that if you're going to have multiple notable events in a given time range, just simply use the time range. That's why I said in my comment in the note that this section still has need to be heavily revised. It's awkward, and the formatting is inconsistent.

Anyway, just my two cents. I see my "2020 - Present" change has been reverted back to my change by another user. I hope this Talk on your page clarifies my stance a little better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihilianth (talkcontribs) 14:41, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Nihilianth,
Thanks for the clarifications. As I said, I agree that there are definitely at least some potential content improvement possible here. But it's simply forbidden by WP policy to use your own logic to draw conclusions or make implications not strictly and directly supported by WP:RS. I see an active discussion on the talk-page about this block of content.
Regarding the sectioning, that's possibly an independent concern. It does seem inconsistent on its face to have top-level sections of centuries and then subsections by event rather than smaller-than-century timeframes. That might be a good separate talkpage discussion. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States seems like the talk-page of the most active relevant wikiproject. You might want to check with them to see if there are any standards for US state articles. DMacks (talk) 03:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-20

18:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Afghanistan ethno-lingustic page

Cia map is wrong, it’s the last time i say, stop blocking me for nonsense, balkh provinces according to wikipedia has tajik majority, but according to cia map wich is because of us political strategies is uzbek!!?? Go and visit balkh province page. According to wikipedia reliable sources al Jazeera is reliable and an independent source. Stop being obsessed with an old and wrong map made by political agenda. 5644Khorasani (talk) 05:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

You can tell me whatever you like. It doesn't matter. I'm just an admin here to guide you towards a discussion with others where you can constructively make your case. And it's quite possible that no matter how right you think you are, others can disagree and also raise strong points of their own. And it's quite possible that your position will not gain WP:CONSENSUS. That's how wikipedia, or any collaborative project works. If you can't accept those facts and take a constructive approach towards others, then I think WP might not be the place for you. DMacks (talk) 02:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, you talked about discussion!!!! I have proved 1000 times CIA map is based US political strategies, to stop iranian influence on persian societies in northern afghanistan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkh_Province This page says most inhabitants of balkh are tajiks, but cia map is trying to turkcize northern afghanistan to stop iran, china corridor. I sugggest please visit wikipedia Reliable sources page for god's sake or whatever you worship!!!! My map is english version of an independent reliable source,an independent news statistics are more acceptable than an inteligence agency!!!!!!!

Hope you are convinced now!!! 5644Khorasani (talk) 08:02, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Your position on reliable sources did not carry the day. In case you missed it, the counter-arguments appear to be that the data were out-dated, and potentially mis-interpretted or differently-categorized. There is no such thing as a automatically blindly 100% accepted source, especially when there are contradictory sources. DMacks (talk) 22:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Man, are you listening or not, I proved that Cia information about balkh province was wrong!!!! So don't see an excuse for rejecting it!!! Let's be honest don't be obsessed with a wrong American made thing which is made because of US god damned strategies in Afghanistan, for limiting Iranian influence in Central Asia, which happily failed!!! And us got the hell out of Central Asia!!!!! Now al-jazzera as an independent news channel according to Wikipedia standarda, says balkh province is considered to have tajik majority, according to world Health Organization statistics which is in balkh province page the tajiks are the majority, please accept that if you have 1% logic!!! Whether you believe or not Cia map is wrong, soon I will put the true map according to al-jazzera, all I want stop being a Wikipedia user obsessed with an old and wrong map made by US which is not even helpful now!!! Thank to the Lord hope you don't make another excuse for my sources, seriously I think you are one of those CIA agents, that's explains your obsession 5644Khorasani (talk) 13:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Good block, Oz/Inter. DMacks (talk) 09:15, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-21

00:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-22

20:27, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

This Month in Education: May 2022

This Month in Education: May 2022

Administrators' newsletter – June 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
  • The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

  Arbitration


Tech News: 2022-23

02:44, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Opinion

Hello there fellow editor! I hope you are doing well. I see that you had reviewed my edit on the wikipedia page written about Phosgene. The fact that you had said "Undue weight on what its not" was not understandable to me, as Phosgene(COCl2) 1) possesses a similar chemical formula to Cobalt dichloride (CoCl2) (a very different compound), and 2) it can be created accidentally by the decomposition of chloroform (CHCl3) and other organochlorine compounds. I did not purposefully mean to share false information, and I also respect your status as an academic in science, but I do not feel that what I wrote was particularly wrong (which you edited out). I may have overemphasized what was already written, which you have commented on, and have worked on it as you have said. E3C4B1 (talk) 12:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi E3C4B1! I had two different main concerns, both related to undue-weight of sentences you added to the WP:LEDE. First is:
It is not to be confused with cobalt chloride(CoCl2).
The case of the letter "o" is obviously important, and readers who get here at capital-"O" wanting the chemical with lower-case-"o" should be be pointed to the correct article. But there is already a note several lines previous:
"COCl2" redirects here. For the compound CoCl2, see Cobalt(II) chloride.
Second is
Phosgene is generally produced accidentally when chloroform(CHCL3) decomposes under exposure to air. Therefore, chloroform should be stored in air-tight containers to prevent the undesirable formation of phosgene.
Again, it's not factually wrong, but it's excessive for the intro. The focus of the article is phosgene, and the lede summarizes the article, so we shouldn't be providing a specific piece of safety advice for some other chemical. It's true that it can be produced this way, but it's not generally done. The word "produced" here made it sound intentional; it's described as an industrial chemical, so "production" sounds like we are talking about how a company would design their process. And again, the immediately-preceding sentence is:
In addition to its industrial production, small amounts occur from the breakdown and the combustion of organochlorine compounds.
which covers this situation. Your addition of "such as chloroform" to that sentence is great! DMacks (talk) 15:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

I will keep that in mind! I do apologize however for over-elaborating some points that I may have missed while editing. I highly value and appreciate that you were able to guide me and review my mistakes. Thank you :) E3C4B1 (talk) 07:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-24

16:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Fardad Fateri for deletion

 
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fardad Fateri 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/Fardad Fateri 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 until the discussion has finished.

Jeepday (talk) 17:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Sock

You mentioned the other account and I believe this is grounds for blocking them for sockpuppetry. Big Aryeh Gh's userpage transcludes Big Ayeh. Although it looks like a clean start, is isn't. See [40][41] 0xDeadbeef 11:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

An admin did warn them about this on their talk page, and it doesn't appear they've used the other account since 2021. ––FormalDude talk 12:49, 20 June 2022 (UTC) (talk page watcher)

Tech News: 2022-25

20:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Semono Drines

I did actually add a negative sign beforehand, so I guess that didn’t explain it… Senomo Drines (talk) 23:45, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Electron-rich

Would you please take a look at this draft: User:Smokefoot/sandbox3? It could be accused of OR or even textbooky. No rush. Cheers,--Smokefoot (talk) 23:31, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

[46] looks like a nice concept-index page. Given each distinct meaning with a cite, I don't think it's OR to say "there are different meanings, here are our WP articles on each". Could also add aromatic-substitution reactivity (or general ideas of inductive- and resonance-donating substituents). DMacks (talk) 23:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Opinion(2)

Hello there fellow editor DMacks! I saw that you had reverted my edit on the page about TCMTB. Even though I was not able to cite it (as the information was from Youtube), my edit that talked about TCMTB's danger to tannery workers and the pollution caused due to it being released freely in the environment is not false. I understand that as you prefer a methodic way to editing Wikipedia pages, you may have reverted it as it was not cited, but it does feel a bit painful to have what I wrote being wiped away in seconds. I hope we have a mutual agreement on that aspect, and I therefore will make sure to cite whatever I am typing on a given page (except if based on personal experiences). Happy editing! :) E3C4B1 (talk) 19:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-26

20:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

This Month in Education: June 2022