User talk:Edgar181/Archive6

Sweet!

So it works! Cool. Thanks for deleting the page 25 Reasons to Buy Vitamin Water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gp75motorsports (talk • contribs) 11:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

24.11.28.169 is back at it

Your old buddy editing from 24.11.28.169 that you blocked in late September [1] for vandalism is back at it. I've reverted the vandalism to [Efren Ramirez] and left a note on the user's talk page. Perhaps some more time in the ban bin would do some good. —A 21:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, he's now blocked again. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Renewing block on 164.58.208.245

[2] This is the ip for my high school, the block on it ends on the 13th, It probably needs to be renewed, so anon editing is blocked to prevent any malicious activity from occuring to articles. There are 2000+ students at my high school and all it takes is one. Thanks, Dualbladeexile 18:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

We generally don't pre-emptively block IP addresses. But I'll keep an eye on this one. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The {{Sharedipedu}} template

I've been substituting it (and {{repeatvandal}}) for a long time ... I'm trying to think of why it's supposed to be transcluded. I guess because because it gets changed frequently enough that every usage should reflect the changes.

Personally, I prefer to substitute them because that makes it much harder for vandals to remove them. Not that that's happened to my knowledge, but you never know. Daniel Case 00:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the idea being transclusion is that these widely used messages can be updated throughout all talk pages if there were ever any significant changes to policy, though I don't see that happening any time soon. Personally, I don't think it matters too much either way, and your reason actually makes quite a bit of sense to me. (Also...I hope my message didn't come across as any kind of complaint - I was intending to explain why I didn't subst it, rather than complain about you changing it.) --Ed (Edgar181) 00:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

With this article, the version that was tagged was not the same as what the article had been for the rest of its life, on the 26th of august an IP dumped a whole heap of text in, over the top of the original. The original however did assert notability (hence not A7), so do you think you can undelete it and roll it back to the pre ip edited version? Viridae^Talk 07:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I see now that earlier versions of the article do not meet the A7 criteria, so I have undeleted the article and reverted to one of the earlier versions. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Viridae^Talk 00:12, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! r.e. NDMA chembox

It's always nice to see folks improving articles. I had to write a short NDMA writeup for class, and the wikipedia article was in pretty bad shape when i found it. I learned chembox on this article - so cool! Thanks for filling in all the blanks :) User:x14n

Thanks for your additions to the article, too! One comment though, if you would like to move an article to a different title, it's better to use the built in move feature (see Help:Moving a page), rather than cutting-and-pasting.--Ed (Edgar181) 13:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Barry Venezuela

What have you blocked this user for? He hasn't made an edit since 7 October (four days ago). First, it's not true that it is a vandalism-only account[3][4], second, the user hadn't received a single warning (or well, I warned him, but he hasn't edited since that warning). An indefinite block seems much too harsh. Melsaran (talk) 18:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Most of the vandalism by this user has been deleted and edits by this user are identical to those of several other editors indef-blocked for vandalism. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Coach mike thompson

Why did you delete coach mike thompson, gaa its a legitimate article???—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cocoapuffdaddy (talk • contribs)

I deleted coach mike thompson because it met criteria A7 for speedy deletion by not making any assertion of notability. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Writing on behalf of a user

Thank you for acting on my WP:AIV request about User:Weasdog. The user's first edit was on the Currie Wot, which is a very obscure aircraft. I was monitoring recent changes and caught the vandalism because I saw this obscure aircraft as one of the recent changes. I've heard of of it but the vast majority of people haven't. There is a chance that this user has some very unusual and constructive knowledge to add to WP. The user has also said "sorry" which is encouraging and much more than most vandals do after being blocked.

I am willing to act as an informal mentor if see if this user can be a useful contributor to WP. Please consider unblock of this user or revise the block to 24 hours. If there are problems, I can contact another admin to reblock. Archtransit 17:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with giving this user a second chance. He is now unblocked. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

User block

You blocked this anon user [5] a month ago or so. Since then, the account has been used for further vandalism and nothing else. FYI. Eusebeus 20:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I've re-blocked for longer. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say thank for your help on the last couple of ip's I've reported. Doing an awesome job! Carter | Talk to me 12:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

User:201.141.213.164

I've extended this user's block to 6 months. He's a return vandal who uses multiple IP addresses from 201.141.. to make the same set of edits to the Merck article. Given the number of IP addresses he uses, a 1 week block simply increases the frequency of his attacks. It's a case I've been following for a couple of months, now, and I didn't think you would mind. Rklawton 16:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I've seen this same vandal many times, too. I only blocked for 1 week because the vandal seems to change IPs often - I'm not sure it will make any difference to extend to 6 months. I also don't think it will hurt either, because collateral damage probably isn't a big issue with the IP based in Spanish-speaking country. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate your having taken time to express thanks regarding my efforts, Ed. I like to help, and will continue to do so when I can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drphilharmonic (talk • contribs) 16:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Keeping redirects

Hi Ed. Is it a common agreement on en-WP to keep all kinds of redirects that could possibly somehow be of any help for someone? I wanted to have a capitalization redirect removed, but I was reverted. I'm always cleaning my home WP from (IMHO) unneeded redirects. --Leyo 17:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

On the English Wikipedia, the general attitude toward redirects is relaxed - they are usually only deleted if they are judged to be doing some harm. Redirects such as the one you marked for deletion may not be needed, but the effort to find, tag, and remove such redirects is probably greater than any cost of just leaving them alone. "Redirects are cheap" seems to be a common attitude around here. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, so I leave the redirects alone in future. Thanks for your prompt reply. --Leyo 17:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Apparently I've made an enemy of that claimjumper pete moron...thanks for the revert! Cheers, — Scientizzle 02:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, every admin has to have some silly vandal that's fixated on them. --Ed (Edgar181) 03:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 16 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article bromopyruvic acid, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 12:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Fenian

Thanks for your quick work protecting this article, and warning the vandals. Much appreciated. I was having some trouble keeping up with them. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, too. I didn't block any of the IP addresses because the IP seemed to be changing quite rapidly, so if you see any related vandalism continuing, please just let me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Rampant vandal

Hello, Edgar181. We have to do more to make it more difficult for the vandal seen in this link...[6]...to edit Wikipedia. You already blocked one of his or her IP addresses, as seen with this link, and as I stated on another administrator's talk page, this vandal will not stop vandalizing Wikipedia, particularly those articles seen in his or her pattern of edits. Flyer22 19:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I hate to say it, but vandalism from those IP addresses is not all that bad, relatively speaking. Nevertheless, I have protected a couple of the vandal's favorite targets. Blocking the IPs probably won't do much good considering how rapidly AOL users are given new IPs. I'll watchlist the other articles too and help revert when necessary. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Edgar, you've been much help. I really appreciate it. Flyer22 20:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

HCl

Hi Edgar

Sorry for the trouble, thanks for catching these problems. --Rifleman 82 14:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

No trouble at all ... just minor fixes. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Chop

Please leave this page in place for the next hour or so. It looked like a spam article becasue I was not finished writing it. I went to save an edit and was told that the page was deleted before it was even finished. Billyoneal 20:55, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, go ahead. I've undeleted it. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• OK done editing now. If this is still bad for Wikipedia, go ahead and delete it. (Also, sorry if its a little unpolished. This is my first article ;))

Billyoneal 21:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Actually, I think its bad. Go ahead and delete it. (And for some reason my changes didnt show up anyway) Billyoneal 21:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

OK. Wikipedia has quite a few quirks, so it can be hard to figure out at first. I hope you stay and continue to contribute! --Ed (Edgar181) 22:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry...

...if I just wasted your time by re-creating Christina Villarreal, you must have deleted it while I had it open finding the speedy-tag instructions. I don't often do RC patrol so it was my first deletion tag.--QuantumEngineer 21:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Agrochemicals

Why did you revert my Agriculture stub inclusion on Azinphos-methyl and Acetochlor? I should have thought that the importance of these active ingredients in agriculture would have been one of the main reasons for this inclusion? Tom 12:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, those articles have more than enough content not to be stubs. If you would like them to be classified as agricultural articles, they should be given an agricultural category instead of a stub tag. I've removed the chem-stub tags again and added a general agriculture category, but I left the agri-stub tags that you re-added. I hope this is fine with you. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I am trawling through the Agriculture stubs as part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture work which is soon to be launched. This is why I came across these and other agrochemical articles, and I'm afraid I added the stub to many of these because even by comparison with other stubs their content was very small. If I understand your viewpoint, what you're saying is that these articles are by nature very small, and therefore should not be stubs? My view is that there is considerable expansion possible, as practically no information on the agriculture side has been developed, and what data there is contains, in some instances, an important anti-chemical POV element which will need balancing or removing. I am willing to bow to your obvious experience if you think the stub category should be removed. Especially Acetochlor now that I have expanded it. Tom 18:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

The way I see things, for chemical articles if it has basic information such as what it is and what it is used for, then it's not really a stub. Nearly every article on Wikipedia needs to be expanded, so I don't find it useful to have a stub tag to indicate the need for additional information. To this end, I've been removing chemistry-stub tags for articles that generally have at least one good paragraph and a reasonable infobox. But I see your point that these articles had insufficient agriculture-related content - so maybe I was too hasty in removing agri-stub tags too. Feel free to add those tags as you see fit - I won't object. I certainly didn't mean to come across as if I was trying to prevent you from doing anything. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

That's quite alright Edgar, sorry to have come across as indignant, you know, one learns a lot very quickly here. Tom 19:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Dimethyl pimelimidate dihydrochloride

Hi, Edgar. You've recently removed {{organic-compound-stub}} template from Dimethyl pimelimidate dihydrochloride article. Although I am pleased that you don't consider this article a stub, I think that there is still too few information added to consider it a mature encyclopedic article. Can you, please, explain your decision? Do you have any objections to put the template back? Anna K. 17:06, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The way I see it, an article doesn't need to be a "mature encyclopedia article" to be considered something more than a stub. Wikipedia is a work in progess and nearly all articles need to be expanded, and I don't think a stub tag is needed to indicate this. However, if you want to put the template back on, I won't object. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

(Yet another) Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For tracking down and dealing with all users/sockpuppets responsible for the Keaston hoax, salting the ground behind you, and then going above and beyond even that level of dedication to ensure that all traces of this hoax were eradicated from Wikipedia, I award you this barnstar. Thanks for all your help! jonny-mt(t)(c) 15:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ed (Edgar181) 16:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You didn't check the page history before deleting hen night

--Sturdy Processor 17:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for catching it. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

re: 71.64.136.222

You had blocked this user before regarding Wall-E so I thought I'd mention it to you that they are continuing to add non-cited (and incorrect) edits to the page. I placed a revert warning on their talk page earlier this morning, but they probably didn't pay it any mind. SpikeJones 23:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll watchlist the article and keep an eye on the editor. Other edits coming from this IP seem to be constructive for now. --Ed (Edgar181)

ALA structure numbering

Hi Edgar,

I made the omega blue because the alpha and omega were different colours, so I had to pick one to be consistent. The numbering scheme from the tail end was already red, so I went with the blue, because both the greek letters and the IUPAC numbering start at the head group (although offset). Maybe we should make the greek letters green instead and change the wording where the diagram is in use? --Slashme 20:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

For fatty acids, there are two separate conventions for numbering the carbon atoms. In physiology, numbering begins at one end ("omega" numbering), in chemistry numbering begins at the opposite end. In the series of diagrams I created for a variety of fatty acids, I colored one numbering system blue and the other numbering system red. The omega symbol should be red to indicate that the red numbers go with the "omega" numbering system. The alpha symbol should be blue because only chemical nomenclature uses that symbol. I don't know if I'm being clear - does that make sense? --Ed (Edgar181) 20:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, now I understand. The fact that the α-carbon atom was labeled had made me think that the alpha and omega were there to indicate the greek numbering scheme as a third alternative. I have fixed it. (Another advantage of svg: Fixes like this can be done with a text editor!) --Slashme 05:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks great. Thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Chemical structures

I think should be better that chemical structures like

I think we do better formulas structure like this in SVG format (scalable vector). Please advise this free software: BKChem

Greetings.

MaxViol

In my opinion, .png structures are just fine. Creating .svg files is not worth the extra effort for me - there is no way that I could have created the thousands of images that I have if I were to have created them as .svg files. I don't mind, though, if others want to take the time to duplicate my work as .svg --Ed (Edgar181) 10:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Coincidence -- I was about to make the same edit you did (delete the "Tyler is funny" line) but you beat me to it by about 5 minutes!  :-) Dave Fafarman 23:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that kind of thing happens quite often with obvious vandalism like "Tyler is funny".  :) --Ed (Edgar181) 23:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Article Julie Hrdlicka

I am wondering why this article was deleted. It was mentioned that Julie is not notable enough for an article. She is running in an upcoming election which does not yet have a set date, the election could be called tomorrow, next wee or next year. In creating her bio I used a template of other candidates that are also running in the upcoming election and have not been deleted. I used a notation to link to the political party that she belongs to prove she is running in the election. I also find it suspicious that her article has been deleted when people who are running against her in the same riding have articles, but do not documented proof that they are running. I can also find several other candidates running in the election that have less proof than Hrdlicka. I am completely baffled, to what is, and what isn't required as proof of notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lemonyjim (talk • contribs) 22:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion was the recommended outcome of the discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julie hrdlicka. If you disagree with the result you can contact the admin who deleted the article, User:Coredesat. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Update

Here are a few updates in the realm of WikiProject Pharmacology:

• The Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week has been changed to Collaboration of the Month, based on current participation levels. It is also more likely that articles collaborated on for one month are more likely to achieve featured quality than articles worked on for only a week or two.

• The current Collaboration of the Month for November is Receptor antagonist. Please take a look at that article and contribute to it if you get a chance. Ideally, the article should adhere to the featured article criteria.

• Therapies for multiple sclerosis is currently a featured article candidate. If you are familiar with the featured article criteria, please visit WP:FAC and review the article.

• Anabolic steroid is the wikiproject's newest Featured Article, having been promoted on October 8, 2007.

• Theobromine was delisted as a Good Article. The Peer review and GA reassessment discussions provide suggestions on improvement. Muscle relaxant was recently reviewed for Good Article status, but not promoted. Please see the full review full review here for details.

Dr. Cash 22:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note

CSD:G4 (recreation of deleted material) isn't a valid criteria unless the material was deleted through AfD or another related process. Speedies and Prods explicitly don't qualify. That said, Kingsley edwards was clearly a deletion candidate, so I guess we can chalk this up to WP:SNOW or so. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there are several CSD criteria that were clearly applicable to that article, but you're right that technically G4 isn't quite one of them. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Lipoxin

Hi Ed. I noticed you added an image to lipoxin today; however, the image description page said "LXA4" while it was actually the structure of lipoxin B₄. I changed the description over at Commons—hope you don't mind :) Nice work as usual and best wishes, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

D'oh! Thanks for catching and fixing it. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

You should put your two images Image:Lipoxin A4.svg‎ and Image:Lipoxin B4.svg‎ in the lipoxin article. It would be good to have the two, each drawn the same way, for comparison. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure? I should probably add another chembox, then. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I put both of your images in. Two chemboxes would be mostly redundant, and therefore not really worth it, I think. Let me know what you think. --Ed (Edgar181) 08:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks good :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Goodoldplace

Hi I am user edward009. I had an article called goodoldplace which had been deleted. I would like to find out why even through there had been reason given but i dont really kind of get it. So i would like to find out.Edward009

I deleted goodoldplace because it did not make any assertion of notability and therefore met criteria for speedy deletion (see WP:CSD#A7). You might also take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (web) to see the general requirements for websites to be included in Wikipedia. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Quick note

- Just to say thanks for blocking that vandal for me over at AIV. Also, was just reading your user page and noticed you typo'd on "privileges". Thanks again, friend! Take care. Scarian^Talk 22:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. And thanks for catching the typo. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you around, Edgar? I have something that needs attention... the background story to it is about a couple of paragraphs in length - so I'm asking if you have the time to read it and decide upon what to do next? Scarian^Talk 23:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I am around now. You can write it here or email me if you prefer. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. User:Navnløs is the antagonist of this little "story". He is a new user whom, I assume like all new users, doesn't grasp Wikipedia etiquette or policy as well as some veteran users. He quickly delved himself into the argument between whether to use line breaks or commas to separate the genres on music articles. Rather than bringing up specific examples, I'll cite generally:

Said user continues to go through music articles putting line breaks instead of commas. Some of his edit summaries have been less than polite when putting them in. And he also cites no policies when he makes those sorts of edits.

Iron Maiden article has evidence of WP:3RR in its history from him (And to a certain extent myself but I pointed out my reasons for reversions clearly in the summary). The Iron Maiden article has always (Confirmed by another admin; User talk:Wiki alf - I asked him personally for confirmation) had commas, but the user continues to push his agenda. My rationale is, correct me if I am wrong, if there is no consensus it should remain the same as it always has been until consensus is acheived.

User talk:Navnløs - I, and an anon, have attempted to discuss with him about his reversions but, seemingly, to no avail. He also has received a warning for his edit warring. I have tried to make my points clear and concise on his talk page.

I've come to you because, I'll be honest, I'm pretty pissed at how he doesn't seem to acknowledge the way Wikipedia works. Understandably he is a new user and I have, hand on heart, explained that if there is no consensus you don't go and make everything linebreaks until there is a consensus. The user doesn't seem to understand that... it's irritating. I personally don't care about the commas or linebreaks... I just don't think that someone should go through Wikipedia with a false impression of how things work. And, of course, I understand that we were all new at some point and we had to learn and we all made mistakes.

So, basically, what I am requesting is that you discuss with him how he should go about the line break/comma situation. He should be told that he cannot keep putting in linebreaks just because it suits him. It is entirely his own opinion - "it looks better" I quote him from an edit summary.

I hope I haven't bothered you with my rant. Sorry if I have. This whole thing has been blown out of proportion in the past week and it's irritating me and the user simply won't listen (The 3RR warning was on the Iron Maiden article and yet he still continues to revert! Crazy stuff)

Thanks for reading and any future input. Scarian^Talk 00:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

EDIT - Apologies, it seems as though an admin caught something and he has been blocked for that breach of the Iron Maiden 3RR warning. Scarian^Talk 00:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I've had a chance to look through that editor's contributions, and I agree that he does seem to be edit warring over a trivial issue. The block seems justified to me, and I was about to turn down his request to be unblocked when another admin stepped in and did it. Hopefullly this will get Navnløs's attention and he will think twice about continuing in the same fashion. In general, the place to go to get help with problem users is Wikipedia:Requests for comment, where bringing the issue to a wider audience often ends up with the editor seeing that his actions are received negatively by other uninvolved editors. Hope this helps. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Just a quick note to say that the unblock request has not been formally refused (or accepted) yet, but I did respond to it. The user has suggested that they will take a break from editing, but I have also ranged blocked 165.196.0/24 for 24 hours, which should prevent any repeat of the recent anonymous editing by the user (at least from their current location). Cheers TigerShark 01:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Edgar. I appreciate it. Scarian^Talk 00:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

User 88.195.14.243

Hi Edgar181,

I noticed that you were the one who blocked this user: 88.195.14.243 probably for his edits to Timothy McVeigh‎. However he has now been unblocked and continues to make changes to Daniel Negreanu, if you look at the history of the page you will notice that he is consistently fighting with other editors on that page [7]. Any help/advice on what to do with this user? He's obviously has shown his unwillingness to work with other editors even when several editors change his edits and explain why his edits have been reverted [8].

Thanks, Strongsauce 01:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The best thing to is to continue to revert where he edits inappropriately, give him polite warnings, and if he persists report him to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR or to WP:AIV. Or you can let me know and I'll block again if needed. Sometimes it's quite frustrating dealing with people such as this, but patience generally gets the best results in the end. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Your user talk page

No problem. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 21:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tetraethylammonium bromide.png

Hi Ed

I think you're missing an Et group? --Rifleman 82 03:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh...tetra means four?  :) Fixed now. Thanks for letting me know. Maybe I was subconsciously trying to avoid something that looked like a swastika. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Haha.. unfortunately that's the "nicest", most symmetric representation. Thanks! --Rifleman 82 13:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Herbythyme

I think you forgot to sign with 4 tildes, all that was there was a date (3 tildes worth... happens to me too sometimes and drives me crazy). I added an {{unsigned2}} but you may want to delete that out, and sign as yourself if you like, or maybe it's not needed,... I leave it to you as you see fit. Hope that helps, happy editing. ++Lar: t/c 16:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it now, thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

AIV activity

Lots of fun with the vandals today, eh? Glad I don't have to deal with them all by myself, though. :) GlassCobra 17:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's a pretty typical day. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

WHY

WHY DID U DELETE THAT PAGE THERE WAS NO REASON FOR IT I WAS TRYING TO DO A CLASS PROJECT AND SINCE U DELETED IT IM NOW FAILING THAT CLASS THANKS ALOT MAN =[ =[ =[ =[ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylepalmer (talk • contribs)

If you want to know why I deleted an article, you have to let me know what article you are referring to. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

M Tickner MM

Why have you deleted my page on my Great Great Uncle, I was in the process of gathering info for the page from relatives, seeing as its remembrance day- 11th November, seeing as he gave his life for our future, I am deeply annoyed.

Please reinstate the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gee1984 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The article M Tickner MM did not make any assertion of notability and therefore met criteria for deletion (see WP:CSD#A7). Considering that this was the fourth time it was speedily deleted, it should be clear that you might be trying to do something that the Wikipedia community doesn't accept. Wikipedia has a standard of notability for the inclusion of biographies, which you can see here: WP:BIO. You might also take a look at a couple of other relevant information pages: WP:NOT#MEMORIAL and WP:COI. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Please can this be reinstated, as I am currently writing the article, it took me a while to create and I would like this page to remain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gee1984 (talk • contribs) 10:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, If you think the subject of the article meets Wikipedia standards for notability as outlined in WP:BIO, feel free to recreate the article, and I won't delete it without discussion. (Just keep in mind that if others feel that the article doesn't meet notability criteria, it may get nominated for deletion by someone else.) --Ed (Edgar181) 12:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, is there anyway of putting it back up ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gee1984 (talk • contribs) 12:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have undeleted the most recent version to give you a chance to establish notablity. Hope this helps. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I have put a proposed deletion tag on the article. If you add content to establish notability, just remove the tag. If the article is not improved, it will remain in a state in which deletion is recommended. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Chemistry articles

I noticed that you've fixed up a few of my mistakes on the stubs I've been creating recently. I don't have access to chemdraw so I'm trying to get around the non-functional export tool in ISIS/Draw with MS Paint and good old cut'n'paste jobs. Anyway, I was searching around wikipedia for policy that told me whether to use a capital at the start of the chemical names when I read your edit summary. Thanks for the heads up! Bobby1011 00:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. And thanks for creating those articles. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You may have already noticed but I created an article about the chemical 2-Phenylethanol which as it turns out is a synonym of Phenethyl alcohol, an article which you created over a year ago. I've tagged them for a merger but some of the info is conflicting so I thought I'd better let you know before I proceed. Mostly it's just tiny discrepancies in melting point data and the like, but we seem to have very different safety data, though my lab may just be getting lazy with researching that sort of thing for the labels(almost all of the organics seem to have the same labels). Bobby1011 01:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. The physical data I added to the phenethyl alcohol article is from the Merck Index, which I think is a reliable and authoratative source, so I would stick with that data; but the safety data just comes from an online MSDS, and these can vary widely in quality, so feel free to use whichever source you prefer. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

		Thank You
		Thank you for reverting trolling on my talk page. I really appreciate it! --EoL talk 22:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

User:125.60.189.62

Thanks for blocking User:125.60.189.62. It looks like User:Bantilan is the same person. – SJL 15:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's clearly the same user. Considering the long-term nature of the vandalism and spamming, I've extended the block. Thanks for pointing this out to me. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

And thanks for blocking User:216.56.12.42, who vandalized my userpage. NHRHS2010 talk 21:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

User jm2153 - unauthorised links

Edgar - I can only offer my most sincere apologies. The Freecycle Group Outreach Advisor for Yorkshire and Humberside asked everyone who was an owner or moderator of a Freecycle group in Y&H to "add in a link to your own Freecycle group in the External Links section (at the bottom of the page). You don't need to be registered to do this and it is very easy (look for 'Edit' at the far right of the External Links section at the end)."

It never occurred to me that this was against Wiki rules/guidelines (and meant I was doing the one thing which we too specifically forbid on Freecycle!!). I have sent a very strong complaint to the Freecycle GOA about their actions which encouraged us to break Wiki rules and has effectively has me into a spammer. To say I am annoyed with Freecycle would be putting it very politely.

Could I ask if you would unblock my IP address please? There's no way I want to be classed as a spammer, nor do I intend to try to add unauthorised links again. I am now going away to grind my axe at the Freecycle end :0))

Many thanks, Jools Jm2153 09:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I can understand that Wikipedia's policies can sometimes be difficult to figure out for newcomers, but Freecycle is clearly encouraging something that is against Wikipedia's guidelines. I have gone ahead and unblocked the IP address. Please feel to stay and contribute to Wikipedia's content. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

16 November 2007 Response from the Freecycle Group Outreach Advisor for Yorkshire and Humberside: I must defend Freecycle from the quote: Freecycle is clearly encouraging something that is against Wikipedia's guidelines The suggestion that groups add links to their own home town page was not recommended by anyone other than me personally within The Freecycle Network and I wholeheartedly apologise again for not appreciating or thinking to check the Wiki guidelines on this matter. I have, of course retracted this suggestion and apologised to the groups previously contacted. With warmest wishes, S. Anderson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.44.133 (talk) 14:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, I understand. Thanks for the clarification and kind response. It seems that everything is settled now. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

RfA

I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

My Apologies, from user 7-Falcon-7

I am writing to apologise about the vandalism on the fullerene page, me and a few mates at school got a bit out of hand showing off in class, i promise this will not happen again, thankyou for not banning my account or IP address.

My sincerest apologies 7-Falcon-7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 7-Falcon-7 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, no problem. Feel free to contribute constructively. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:53, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Depressed about Protriptyline edit glitch (not really)

Thanks for your contributions to Protriptyline‎. I don't know if it's intentional or not, but twice you have deleted content (the category and the {{Antidepressants}} template) from the article. They are there for a reason and shouldn't be deleted. Thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

It was accidental (thanks) but let's take a look at what happened

My first edit kept the category & template as intended. My 2nd edit was brief but accidentally dropped the category & template. You fixed the error and added .

Your edit came in so quickly after my error that it caused an edit conflict with my 3rd revision, which was to add some text.

I was pissed at you for so eagerly fact-alizing my edit but I nonetheless faithfully copied your into my newly edited text and saved the changes.

THEN I looked at the page history and noticed your helpful edit comment regarding deleted text. Mortified, I tried to replicate the inexplicable error, thinking there might be a software error regarding categories/templates because I had not logged in today since I'm using a friend's computer. My conclusion is there is no bug: using an unfamiliar keyboard was probably the culprit.

I award this round to you, greatly appreciate the error you caught, assert that the new content is factual, note that I no longer have time to dig up & format a citation for you, and suggest that you might temper your fact-flagging somewhat where nearly empty stub articles are concerned. Any reasonable content, to get the wikiprocess going, is better than nothing. Although I'm a long term editor here, one would not want to discourage new editors who may choose to contribute in good faith to a nearly empty article. --70.18.130.56 (talk) 18:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia certainly has its glitches, and I can't explain the unintended deletion either. When I first edited the article, I didn't realize that you were still working on it, so I apologize if it caused trouble for you. As for fact-tagging nearly empty articles, I think the standard for citing references should be the same for articles of any size. I hope it doesn't come across as if I were doubting the information you've added and I certainly haven't doubted that your contributions were in good faith, it's just that referencing is an important part of writing Wikipedia articles (though it often gets neglected). The fact tag is there more to encourage others to add the reference, rather than to put doubt on the statement or on your editing. I hope this doesn't discourage you from continuing to contribute to Wikipedia - Wikipedia's pharmacology articles would benefit from knowledgable editors. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Calcium propionate

Can you possibly add a molecular diagram for Calcium propionate? Badagnani (talk) 07:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Also Potassium bromate. Badagnani (talk) 07:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Also DATEM. Badagnani (talk) 07:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I've done the first two. It seems that DATEM is not a single chemical compound, but more like a category of related compounds - or a mixture. I'll see if I can find more. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Calcium iodate

Calcium iodate (lautarite) appears to need an article. Badagnani (talk) 07:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I created the article as a very short stub. If I have a chance later today, I can try to expand it. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

RFC discussion of User:RodentofDeath

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of RodentofDeath (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/RodentofDeath. -- edg ☺ ☭ 15:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

PhosLo

Just wanted to drop you a line and tell you that it wasn't meant to be advertising. My husband is on peritoneal dialysis and takes phoslo due to hyperphosphetamia (i just butchered the spelling I'm sure) and it's done wonders for him. I was really only trying to write an informed but short article on it. I suppose I'll read up more on how not to do that and try again, this time without sounding like ad ad for PhosLo.

Sorry hon. Libby —Preceding unsigned comment added by DemonicSymphony (talk • contribs) 20:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps I was a bit hasty, so I've restored phoslo, particularly seeing how it is mentioned and/or linked to from other articles. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Laaza

Hi there. I believe an article on Laaza was just deleted. This user is new I think -he has uploaded Image:Laaza.JPG. I've informed him that wikipedia isn't a directory of websites, but there does appear to be something about this -it looks like a search engine site to me. Could I please see what was there before and see if ther eis anything I can do to make it a valid stub. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 15:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually there is only one google hit. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 15:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's quite clearly non-notable, but here's the content of the article:Laaza is a internet gateway website that gives links of the popular web sites in one page and allows users to modify those links according to their need once they log in. Launched on 9 November 2007, Laaza was founded by Apurva Gupta,with help of his brother Apaar Gupta and childhood friend Ajaya Dev Acharya. As of late November 2007, the website has grown rapidly as more users from United Kingdom, United States Of America and India are making it home page and using on regular basis. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Androstenone

Hi Ed. The structure you uploaded and added to the article differs from PubChem and the articles in German and Japanese. Which one is correct? --Leyo (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You're right, it is different. It is most likely that I made an error in the image, so you can switch to the one used on the other language articles. But I have found that PubChem has quite a few errors too, so I'll double check in Chemical Abstracts when I have a chance tomorrow. Thanks for catching it and letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I have checked with Chemical Abstacts and my original structure was indeed incorrect. I have updated my .png image instead of replacing with the .svg image used in the other articles, because that one does not show all the stereochemistry. Thanks again for catching the error. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

the article on the quog

hi, you recently deleted my article on the quog for vandalism, and frankly i dont see vandalism. this is a quote directly from the wikipedia article on vandalism: Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, or the insertion of nonsense into articles.

i didnt put in anything dirty, i created the page so theres no way i would delete it. and yes i agree that this page is utter nonsense but it is a humoruos article that will be the outline for a movie that i am creating (its kind of like heroes360 or the lost experience). so if theres any way for this site to stay up, please let me know

A.P. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashreipinkus (talk • contribs) 01:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You say that vandalism includes "insertion of nonsense" and then agree that you created a page that is "utter nonsense" ... but in any case, the article is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:Notability for some general guidelines about what is acceptable and what is not. Thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

dangerous dave

the article you marked for speedy deletion entitled "dangerous dave ly" was labelled as "patent nonsense" the wikipedia definition of "patent nonsense" is:

Wikipedia writers and editors contribute a lot of brilliant prose, but occasionally some patent nonsense. This falls into two categories:

Total nonsense, i.e., text or random characters that have no assignable meaning at all. This includes sequences such as "i9da7gy98sdygida%£U%ETDF93ujfHc8vda097tt{%£^O&£^IEUyrhgietysbvd}TYu{og;d", in which keys of the keyboard have been pressed with no regard for what is typed (or typed with the eyes closed).

Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever.

The article on Dangerous Dave, which was completely factual, does not come under either of these catagories. Could you please reinstate this article?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbeere (talk • contribs) 16:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The article was obviously unacceptable for Wikipedia. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:24, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Galaxy articles

Hi,

ok then. Maybe I should use the speedy deletion tags more carefully/sparingly or take such articles to Afd. But articles like NGC 88 which have no written text whatsoever, can be tagged for speedy deletion right?

I just don't want to cause more damage than good.

Regards

User Doe _☻T ^☼C 22:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed tags from the ones that I thought were clearly not candidates for speedy deletion, but some of the others that you tagged are, in my opinion, borderline. Some admins might delete, others wouldn't. The articles such as NGC 88 do have content in the infoboxes, even if they don't have any text. Perhaps they should be tagged with {{notability}} or {{importance}} (in addition to the stub tags already on them), rather than deleted? I also think it would be a good idea to get input from the relevant wikiprojects before adding any more speedy deletion tags. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

My bad, wikipedia.

Hello, this is 24.45.142.181, anyways, I edited the wikipedia article for PCP a few days ago, I added something that said "explosive wet gas" I think, well, I was intoxicated when I decided to put this on there, I was wondering the internet reading so many things because of my paranoia(chemical-induced paranoia, if I must say). Anyways, thanks for not banning me, I love the wikipedia and I read it every day anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.142.181 (talk) 01:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Oleuropein

Hi, can you help get the infobox on the right instead of across the whole top of the article at Oleuropein? Badagnani 04:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

It looks like Rifleman82 already took care of it. This is an ongoing issue with the chembox template. Most browsers force a line break with long chemical names or SMILES strings which keeps the boxes a reasonable width, but some browsers don't. It's something that has been brought up in the chemistry Wikiprojects, but no solution has been found, as far as I know, aside from manually adding line breaks. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Question about block

Regarding:

• 125.60.189.62 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Collateral damage:

• Bluemask (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hey, I stumbled across this unblock request today, and, the user in question really seems to be a good editor.... I was wondering, if you would mind if I changed the block to anon-only, as that IP appears to be shared... SQL^{Query me!} 10:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to say that I unblocked 125.60.189.62. The spamming doesn't look at all like it is related to Bluemask. I'm thinking that you'll be asleep or at work for a while yet. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, SQL and Angus. Clearly Bluemask is a good editor, and I don't want to see him blocked from editing. The IP has been used for spamming the same company "Bantilan Entertainment" from the very first edit in Feb 2007 to the most recent edit in Nov 2007 (along with a bunch of socks, too), so there are two possiblities. 1) the IP is not static, but just doesn't change hands often and was "released" by the spammer when it was blocked and then it rotated to another of the ISP's subscribers, Bluemask; or 2) the IP is static and shared. If the first case is true, the IP should just remain unblocked. If the second case is true, the IP should probably be blocked from anonymous editing because of the long-term spamming issue. For now, it seems best to just leave the IP unblocked and I'll keep an eye on the IP and soft-block if the problem returns. That shouldn't have an effect on Bluemask. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock. I am currently in one of my project sites that are subscribed to Smart. It seems that Smart is sharing the IP to their subscribers. --bluemask ^(talk) 13:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, it wasn't me who actually unblocked. But anyway, thanks for the info. Happy editing! --Ed (Edgar181) 13:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Well done

What an amazingly quick response to the request for an intervention against vandalism at Ein Hod! Thanks for that. Tiamut 15:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

What happened here?

What happened here? Was I editing a vandalized article? Ace of Spades IV (talk) 22:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the article was vandalized earlier today. Unfortunately, no one caught it right away. Sorry that the additions you made ended up being undone. Please feel free to add to the article if you see any improvement that it still needs. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

All right, thanks. Good job catching it. Ace of Spades IV (talk) 23:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Problem with troll

Hi Edgar, I have a minor problem and would like a view from an administrator. IP address 68.55.128.232 has been used almost exclusively for vandalism and I categorised it as such. (The vandalism is mainly teenage stuff but occasionally offensive and/or racist.) The said individual didn't like this and reverted the changes a few times. He then set up a single purpose account Galdr whose sole activity (apart from one edit) has been reverting edits on User talk:68.55.128.232 and posting warnings to my talk page. I obviously don't want to find myself blocked by a slapdash admin on the basis of some spurious warnings by a troll. Can I remove these warnings with impunity? What is the appropriate action against 68.55.128.232/Galdr? Nunquam Dormio (talk) 09:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the warnings from your page. I've also removed the vandalism category from the IP, more for the purpose of diffusing things than anything else. Admins will be able to properly evaluate the history of editing from that IP whether the category is there or not. It's probably best if you just leave that editor and that IP address alone for now, and just let me know if you see any vandalism. I'll keep an eye out too. In the future, you can remove warnings on your own talk page, and let people remove them from theirs. Thanks for remaining civil and asking for assistance. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Ed. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Potassium perchlorate

Hi, can you add a molecular diagram for Potassium perchlorate? Badagnani (talk) 06:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, done. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The compound thanks you as well! ;-) I don't know how you do it. Badagnani (talk) 07:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Star

Thanks for the Barnstar, Ed. Very much appreciated! Plantsurfer (talk) 17:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Chase Austin

I'm dropping you a note to let you know that I undeleted his article. You speedy deleted it (rightly, I might add) back in September 2006 as non-notable. He has accomplished a lot since then, and he now will be racing in a high level NASCAR series in 2008. He's in a major team's driver development program. Royalbroil 03:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I just nominated it for DYK. I found lots of nice independent sources, since he was the first African American to race in a NASCAR Busch Series oval track race in October 2007. I found out about the article at the request for articles page. Royalbroil 19:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Great article! Perhaps the interesting fact that he was the first African American to race in that NASCAR series should be mentioned in the into. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Please help with user:216.204.49.50

I'm really sorry to bother you with this, I know you must be really busy ... I've been patrolling the 'recent changes' and this user is doing a lot of vandalism again ... you have blocked him before but apparently that wasn't enough ... can you please take a look at his recent contributions and judge for yourself if action needs to be taken - I would appreciate it if you could take a look when you get a chance - thanks, Ukt-zero (talk) 13:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I have blocked the IP from editing and reverted the vandalism. Thanks for letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for taking the time to do this ... I also noticed that you took care of his latest batch of vandalism and reverted them back to normal as well, thanks for that too, saved me the time and effort of doing it myself - it's nice to know that there are people in Wikipedia that will take care of things like this when they come up -- Ukt-zero (talk) 08:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for the barnstar. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Tori King

Why did you delete this page with no discussion please?  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 20:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

It clearly met criteria for speedy deletion. Please see WP:CSD#A7. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate.png

Hi Ed. While wikifying a recent addition to 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate, I noticed an old edit in the history claiming the structure was incorrect (as my SVG version was until five minutes ago). It appears there's an extra double bond—see [9]. I've momentarily replaced the image with a (hopefully corrected) SVG. Hope you're enjoying your break ;) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, I can't stay away entirely during my break... Thanks for catching and correcting the double-bond error. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Userpage vandalism

Thanks for the revert, Ed! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 23:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

University of Aberdeen, Scotland blocked?

Hi Ed,

Are you aware that you have blocked the entire University of Aberdeen, Scotland from editing Wikipedia, by banning the IP address 139.133.7.38? This is the main proxy server for the University. Is there not a more selective way you can do the blocking?

David Benson, 6th Century Chair of Mathematics, University of Aberdeen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.5.100 (talk) 12:18, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware that I have blocked an IP address belonging to Aberdeen University, but there is no way of telling whether that blocks the entire University from editing. However, I have only blocked anonymous editing from that IP address. Anyone who wishes to edit Wikipedia may do so simply by signing up with an account. Due to the ongoing persistent vandalism from the University, the IP has been blocked many times already, including prior blocks of a month or more. This is has failed to stop the vandalism, so a longer-term block of anonymous editing is warranted, and well within Wikipedia's blocking policy. Unfortunately, if the University is sending all its internet traffic through a single proxy server, there is no more selective way of dealing with the issue from Wikipedia's end, as far as I am aware. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:41, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

MBDB

Can you draw a nicer structure please. Thanks. -- 84.75.156.176 (talk) 02:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, done. -- Ed (Edgar181) 03:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Please review Vicine

There seems to be some difference of opinion on the chemical structure of vicine. The Cornell page cited gives a different structure. Please see my comments on the talk page-- I'm not a chemist, nor do I play one on Wikipedia, but the discrepancy is obvious to anyone who checks. Perhaps a different reference is in order? I dropped you this message as you were the creator of the original image. Mangoe (talk) 04:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, I replied at the talk page. The two structures are tautomers and represent the same chemical compound. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)