User talk:Bunkerpr

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Radians

Thank you for your considered response to my edit. Your clarification that "problems can arise if angles are considered to be dimensionless" is a vital one. I wonder if the message that readers should take may be that radians are not a useful way to measure angles, even if mathematically elegant. But that would be WP:OR, unless a wp:RS says so? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that references to the papers of Mohr and Phillips and by Mills would be reasonable. People should realize that confusion can arise. But I am not going to do anything more about the Wiki on Radians. Bunkerpr (talk) 23:30, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:44, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Bunkerpr. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Philip Bunker, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Tacyarg (talk) 22:37, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately Prof. Bunker does not seem to have seen this notification and is still editing his own page. I truly believe that he's doing so without having seen this message. KeeYou Flib (talk) 21:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good day Mr. Bunker

Hello, Thank you for your edit on 2-butyne -- Ktsquare (talk) 23:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

The following was posted on the user page.—Anita5192 (talk) 15:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Do you have a reference for the biographical information you’ve been posting? If so that should be cited and the entry can stay as it is. Otherwise it’s unsubstantiated.

To clarify further, when you reverted my edit you mentioned several other scientists for whome elementary schools are listed. In every single one of those cases a citation is provided, but you have not provided one. To cite information without providing sources for it is what I mean by "providing non-encyclopedic information." KeeYou Flib (talk) 13:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To cite Philip Bunker's attendance at Batterse Grammar School, is the following a possibility?

https://www.oldgrammarians.org.uk/cgi-bin/ School_Magazines_Images_View.asp?PIM=Battersea%20Grammar%20School\1959\00000495.TIF

Aha! I did it and it worked. You can check if it is OK. Maybe you should remove my edit and then do it yourself since for some peculiar reason I am not supposed to edit my own page. And also, none of my students have a Wiki page as far as I am aware, although one MAY exist for Per Jensen but this is a very common name in Denmark. He deserves a Wiki page. Each of my three students worked with me at NRC but they had university positions. I had an adjunct position at Carleton University which allowed me to supervise Stephen Ross. Both Per Jensen and A. Marjatta Lyyra were supervised by me in Ottawa but their degrees were from their home universities.

Hi, yes, I don't make the rules -Wikipedia's editing guidelines are a consensus decision that has evolved over decades, and we all should try to respect them. Again, PLEASE just put whatever changes you want made here, or on the talk page, or on my talk page, and either I'll make the edits or someone else will.

Also, I believe all of the things you are saying about where you went to school, who you've supervised, and what faculty appointments you had, but this information needs to be posted somewhere else online in order to include them because sources must be both reliable AND verifiable. I worked really hard to verify these points of information but I don't see any corroboration anywhere, not even in your own online CV and/or web page.

Finally, I'll have a look at your colleague and see if I can prove that a page is justified. If so, I'll work on that - but other editors will have to agree with me about that, as it happens. I worked hard to get your page up to a point where it was accepted for inclusion. KeeYou Flib (talk) 20:47, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your patience with me! I tried to find a reference to my presence at Battersea Grammar School and did find what I put in. But if you think it no good then delete it. I think I will stop looking at it any more. I know the rules are none of your business but I completely disagree with them and particularly with the rule that contributors are anonymous. It is like referees. I believe they should not be anonymous to make sure of their credibility and to ensure that they are accountable for what they have written. I am disturbed by the fact that the students these days turn first to Wikipedia rather than to a book that has been carefully written by a known expert. The Wikis on molecular symmetry and on spectroscopy are really bad I am afraid. I have tried to patch the one on symmetry but it needs a complete rewrite. Then why should I do that? I have written two books on the subject, one of which is very cheap. Am I supposed to paraphrase these books in wiki pages? I trust you appreciate my frustration. The wiki on symmetry does not clearly explain the connection between point groups and permutation-inversion groups so I have prepared a power point file (actually turned into a pdf file) that does this. I added it as an external link and have just noticed that someone who calls himself or herself 'Smokefoot' removed it. I have put it back in order that the information is there for students but probably Smokefoot will remove it. What is the possible justification for removing it? Anyway it is not your fault and I really appreciate all the effort you have made and are making to set up my Wiki page within the stupid rules of wiki land.

No thanks necessary, it's my privilege to try to be helpful to you. Since wikipedia is a totally free resource being provided by user donations and run by a volunteer user community, it's hard for me to think of the rules the community has set up as being "stupid" or its editors as thoughtless or, worse, incompetent. My favorite adjective is "imperfect", and I feel like that can be improved by continuing to volunteer and serve on the site.

There are only really five rules, called "pillars," and those are expressed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars. You might notice the fifth one in particular! What you're thinking of as "rules" are really best described as crowd-sourced editorial policies. As such, these are a moving target and they do change. Moreover, all individual users and groups of users are free to work for change. There are active debates happening all the time on this site. I don't always agree with the outcomes, but I do often learn something by participating in them. And once in awhile I do find someone who agrees with me. Probably the most important rule on wikipedia is WP:CONSENSUS, which is worth reading. KeeYou Flib (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for explaining all this to me. At 80 years old it is sometimes hard to accept a new way of doing things! But I still feel that authors should be encouraged to identify themselves since this would (or would not) give credibility to what they write. I certainly plan always to identify myself if I make any contribution since I am big-headed enough to think I know what I am talking about when I edit something!! I am looking to try to add some more humour to wiki biographies! See footnote 1 of the Wiki on Robert S Mulliken! I am amazed that Christopher L-H would do that in this Royal Society publication but I do sympathise with his opinion from my interactions with Mulliken. I also identified the graduate student behind the door in that famous group photograph on Mulliken's page. That is a good one!!

Per

I'm very sorry to have just heard of the passing of Per Jensen. My sincerest condolences for his loss. Although I have never met him, I was an admirer of his work and we are all the poorer for his passing. I suppose you must know about this memorial page but I'll post it here anyway, just in case. https://www.gatheringus.com/memorial/prof-per-jensen/9264?c=973 Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 13:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sergey Yurchenko and I wrote this obituary. I am glad you appreciated Per. Bunkerpr (talk) 21:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. A1E6 (talk) 06:47, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speak now or etc etc

Hi, I think that if you want to continue editing on Wikipedia, you should come to the ANI discussion that’s been opened and express a willingness to strictly avoid COI from now on, and commit to fixing the citation issues that have been raised. I’d like to see you continue here, I think you have valuable knowledge to share, please consider it. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 23:39, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. You have been warned, and blocked. Any further disruption and you will be blocked indefinitely. Star Mississippi 16:48, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop editing the philip bunker page

Please stop editing the Philip Bunker page - you have already been advised that this is a conflict of interest on your part. If you want changes made, post them to the article's talk page and other editors will take care of them. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 21:06, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This also applies to your IP address Mr. Bunker, which I noted as well at User talk:2607:FEA8:BDA0:13F0:F16A:69BD:184A:2153. Please do not edit that page at all, or you will be further blocked. Star Mississippi 00:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Philip Bunker) for Continuing to edit this article despite warnings.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 01:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HBJ Hamiltonian

The HBJ Hamiltonian can be cited using http://acronymsandslang.com/definition/4642636/HBJ-meaning.html This is something that Bunker is well known for. Bunkerpr (talk) 13:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest Edmonds

There is a Wikipedia page for Ernest Edmonds, a British artist and a pioneer in the field of computer art. He is a cousin of Philip Bunker and maybe each of their Wiki pages should refer to the other?.

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]