Jump to content

User talk:DMacks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Erich Clar page

[edit]

I want to include a synthetic reaction that is known as Clar's reaction. It is of a certain class of cyclic ketones that condense with themselves when heated to 400 C in a mixture of zinc dust and zinc chloride.

I will add references and a description of what it is used for in synthesizing new polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

Requesting clarity on the comments you’ve left on the article I’ve submitted

[edit]

Hello, I am requesting clarity on the comment you’ve left on the article I’ve submitted for creation. I have added a host of verifiable references and citations, and have followed reviewers advice at every turn, as clearly shown in the edit log. Therefore, your comment “same BLP unfixed mess” as your reason for repeatedly declining the submission is in no way helpful, and does not seem to represent a good faith attempt at objective editing. Some clarification would be very much appreciated. Hungryscamp (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article states a birthdate. There is no ref for that fact. The article states "earning first chair in both during middle and high school, but ultimately committed his studies to the guitar, studying jazz at the University of North Carolina Wilmington." but there is no ref for any of those details. The article highlights "multiple seasons of Moonshiners on the Discovery Channel, and Lone Star Law on Animal Planet" but the ref only supports Animal Planet generally. The article states "using the field recording techniques made famous by Alan Lomax.[8]" but ref #8 does not mention Lomax, and this sentence itself appears to be trying to ride Lomax's coattails. "Johnson is a music educator and has cultivated a global following through an instructional platform where he teaches guitar technique and theory[3]" but the ref only supports that he released a single educational item and nothing about a "global following", etc. To put it simply, every fact must have a cited WP:RS reference (so that typically also excludes refs that are mostly interview format or collections of quotes). DMacks (talk) 19:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification. I did not provide ref for birthdate, as Wikipedia guidelines state: “The policy on sourcing is Wikipedia:Verifiability, which requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations.” ] I did not see the subject’s birthdate as being information likely to be challenged, which is why I did not provide ref here. I will add reference or remove the birthdate, but I do believe that your leading with that here is evidence that you are making a personalized dispute and not an objective edit.
I would argue, as well, that the ref for the section on high school studies is supported by the article which does mention the subject playing trumpet and baritone at South Brunswick High School. However, I will remove the inclusion that the subject earned first chair in both, since you find that contentious as well.
In your 3rd point, you state that “The article highlights "multiple seasons of Moonshiners on the Discovery Channel, and Lone Star Law on Animal Planet" but the ref only supports Animal Planet generally.” This is absolutely not true, as the second sentence in the article states “His original music has been licensed to Dodge Motor Co, Ken Burns, the Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, PBS, and more.” Therefore, your reason for dispute is again inaccurate. I will, however, include additional citations to evidence the specific shows on those specific networks, as I am doing all that I can to follow protocol.
Re: referencing Alan Lomax’s recording techniques in the section on field recording, the article does describe the recording techniques used to record the referenced album. However, I understand that you are discounting the validity of that reference, based on your assertion that WP:RS “typically also excludes refs that are mostly interview format.” This does seem to be subjective on your part and further evidence that this is personal and not objective editing. However, I will remove the reference to Lomax, to again show my own effort to act in good faith.
Re: your final contention that I did not provide sufficient reference/citation to prove that "Johnson is a music educator and has cultivated a global following through an instructional platform where he teaches guitar technique and theory,” the provided citation does specifically reference “ Justin also recently released a three-part instructional DVD series, Roots Music According to Justin Johnson, about how to build and play traditional roots instruments.” However, you are correct that it does not reference the global following or the further development of that educational platform over the years, so I will add citations to further prove those points. Hungryscamp (talk) 20:48, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The threshold for "biography of living persons" details is higher than other types of claims, including for reasons of privacy. The threshold for anything that sounds even remotely promotional is likewise (because we as editors are not allowed to editorialize or write non-neutral content). DMacks (talk) 09:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2024-44

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Gomberg radical reaction has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 29 § Gomberg radical reaction until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary reverts in environmental articles.

[edit]

I recently added a link to "Islamic Environmentalism" to pertinent environmental articles, given that they included various other envionmental relevant links. However, my edits were reverted without a clear rationale. Especially articles that deal with religious philosophies like "Christian views on environmentalism" and "Judaism and environmentalism" and "Environmental philosophy" were all WP:Relevant to this link. Honestly, your aggressive reverts were inappropriate. 182.183.14.143 (talk) 07:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benzoylurea

[edit]

Hello Dmacks, it has been a few weeks now and the page is still in dispute. Can you have a look at the talk page and see if you agree with what I proposed, Thanks Bosula (talk) 11:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping! Connectivity spotty at the moment...I'll check back and hopefully be able to respond in a few hr. DMacks (talk) 19:06, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That was hella-spottier than I had hoped. Thanks for your patience and work on this set of articles/topics. DMacks (talk) 05:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Tech News: 2024-45

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Emmanuel Issoze-Ngondet.jpg

[edit]
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Emmanuel Issoze-Ngondet.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:16, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My edits on Forensic Biology and Emile Achard

[edit]

Dear Sir, many thanks for the edits you did on the above two pages. From the number of my edits, you surely know I am a beginner. You are obviously an expert. I am still learning, and I do not want to commit an inadvertent mistake. You say that my edit on Forensic Biology was better, but not a similar edit in my edit on the page in Emile Archard. Simply for the sake of learning I need to humbly ask you (1)can one make similar edits [i.e. add same information] on two different pages? I thought one could, because a reader might simply visit one of the two pages (2)How is it that an edit is good for one page, but not for another page? This is purely for learning sir. Thanks and warm regards. Neotaruntius (talk) 02:48, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Neotaruntius! Always glad to see eager new editors on science articles. Wikipedia often has several articles on related or overlapping topics, and I agree that a certain piece of information should be included on all of the pages where it is relevant. Sometimes the way the information is written might need to vary so that it fits each different context. And as always, the only details we're supposed to include are those that are exactly supportable by the references.
What you wrote in Forensic biology was "One of the earliest studies on post-mortem microbial analysis was published by Émile Achard"[7]. The ref you cited says what the Achard paper was about and that it was an early work in the field. So what you wrote clearly fits the topic of "forensic biology" and the details are supported by the ref.
What you wrote in Émile Achard was "In 1895, he along with E. Phulpin wrote a paper related to microbiology of the dead bodies, which is often quoted as one of the earliest publications on forensic microbiology."[8] The ref (at least the first page that I can read for free) does not seem to say Achard's paper is "often quoted as", merely that this ref itself says it. The situation is like reporting a single data-point but stating that it proves a trend.
So that's why I copied something like the forensic biology wording into the Achard article. And I adjusted the wording in the Achard article to link back to the forensic-biology article: "In 1895, he along with E. Phulpin wrote one of the earliest studies on post-mortem microbial analysis based on forensic biology."[9] That allows readers to learn more about that topic. One of the Wikipedia content guidelines is to "build a web" rather than writing self-contained or stand-alone articles.
Thanks for dropping by to ask! I'm certainly happy to discuss further about these edits or other WP questions. DMacks (talk) 07:55, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]