User talk:Jamesmsnead

Welcome!

Hello, Jamesmsnead! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! DVdm (talk) 23:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Talk pages

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Scientific consensus are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines, not for general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 23:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Scientific consensus for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 00:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice board notices

Hi James, I just noticed that you opened a dispute resultion request a few days ago ([1]) without leaving a note on my or J. Johnson's user talk page. Next time, please notice the involved parties as explained on the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard:

Ensure that you deliver a notice to each person you add to the case filing by leaving a notice on their user talk page. DRN has a notice template you can post to their user talk page by using the code shown here: {{subst:drn-notice}}. Be sure to sign and date each notice with four tildes (~~~~). Giving notice on the article talk page in dispute or relying on linking their names here will not suffice.

Thanks. - DVdm (talk) 13:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. James: perhaps you are not actually clueless regarding WP process and standards, but you certainly, and strongly, appear so. E.g.: either you failed to read the notice at the DRN board to Ensure that you deliver a notice to each person you add ... (which DVdm has kindly added here; emphasis in the original), or you willfully failed to do that. Similarly for other cluelessness evident in the discussion at Talk:Scientific consensus E.g.: your comment of 15:54, 13 Feb ("As I object to the reference, there is no longer a consensus to keep it.") displays a fundamental misunderstanding of what consensus is.

It is evident that you also do not understand the DRN process. (Or have very successfully given that impression.) DRN is not for continuation of a Talk page content dispute, where EVERYONE ELSE HAS REJECTED your peculiar and specious interpretations. Your behavior has been disruptive, and that can lead to being blocked. If you want to participate here you really need to learn "the rules". ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:59, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I just found the note you added to my User page. Please be advised: notifications should be on the User_talk page. And don't just add some text at the bottom of the edit window: use the "New section" tab at the top of the page. Also, if you want re-open the DRN case – which, by the way, is NOT a good idea — there is a specific form to use. Please READ (and heed) everything at the top of the DRN page. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Astroelectricity

The article Astroelectricity has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wholly unsourced article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Opal|zukor^(discuss) 13:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the opening of the Wikipedia article on hydroelectricity. "Hydroelectricity, or hydroelectric power, is electricity produced from hydropower." There are no source references for origination of this term and the article finds it necessary to define what the terms means. How does this differ from what I wrote that defines what the term astroelectricity means?

I have used the term for several years in my writings, including one book with this title. Just as someone coined the term hydroelectricity, I coined the term astroelectricity to indicate the source of the electrical power when no other such term was in common use. Further, I have been invited to give presentations on this topic including three in Portugal this past year. Also, others are now adopting this term in Europe. I was made aware that a recent study titled "Switzerland: An Astroelectricity Startup Nation" has been prepared by others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesmsnead (talk • contribs) 20:46, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign all your talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~) and indent the messages as outlined in wp:THREAD and wp:INDENT — See Help:Using talk pages. Thanks.

The difference is that "hydroelectricity" is broadly mentioned in the literature (Google Books hydroelectricity), but "astroelectricity" is not (Google Books astroelectricity). If you have written a book about it, Wikipedia will wait until the book is amply recognised and mentioned in the literature. Anyone can a write book about anything, but that does not mean it will be covered in Wikipedia—see wp:RS and wp:UNDUE. And we certainly are not allowed to promote our own work here—see wp:COI. Give it five years or so. - DVdm (talk) 00:12, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Astroelectricity

I noticed you recently created Astroelectricity, without citing any sources.

When I researched the topic, most of the coverage I found seemed to be from someone with a similar name to you ("Mike Snead").

While Wikipedia welcomes experts in contributing, please be aware of the potential conflict of interest here. Generally, editing topics on which you have a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged. Additionally, unless there are sources about Astroelectricity other than from Mike Snead, the article is likely to be deleted per Wikipedia's notability policy.

Thank you for contributing, and please let me know if you have any questions, I'm here to help! Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 13:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]