User talk:LossIsNotMore

Hi, LossIsNotMore, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like this place — I sure do — and want to stay. Before getting too in-depth, you may want to read about the Five pillars of Wikipedia and simplified ruleset. If you need help on how to title new articles check out the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. If you need help look at Wikipedia:Help and the FAQ , plus if you can't find your answer there, check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my user talk page or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will be by to help you shortly.

Additional tips

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
You can sign your name using three tildes (~). If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Five will get you the datestamp only.
You may want to add yourself to the new user log.
If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
If you're still entirely confused, or would like to get a better grasp of your wikipedia skills, and you have an IRC client (or don't mind getting one), check out the Bootcamp. It's not what it sounds like, but it is fun and can help you with your editing skills.
If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.

Happy Wiki-ing. —Kf4bdy ^talk ^contribs

PS: This is not a bot and you did nothing to prompt this message. This is just a friendly welcome by a fellow Wikipedian.

Click here to respond to this message!

How come you deleted Henney Kilowatt electric car?

I think it is good on the list because of the historical perspective. Daniel.Cardenas 00:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uranium trioxide molecule

Thanks for the link to NIST's UO₃ .mol!

I made my most recent image from the information on the C_2v uranium trioxide molecule in an argon matrix.

Ben 19:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Atomic Energy phase diagram

James--

I have the phase diagram. I don't feel as comfortable placing copyrighted info on-line (nor have the location to do it). Could I send it to you? It's kinda complicated, and I won't be able to describe it on the UO3 talk page. Olin 21:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PDF

Image:Levinskii74.pdf Sorry, I'll be deleting this in a minute or two, we don't allow any PDFs, and we don't allow copyrighten works. -- Zanimum 20:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. -- Zanimum 20:27, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, check out http://www.supload.com/ -- Zanimum 20:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever looked at this article?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=5527739&dopt=Abstract

It's called "On the oxide fume formed by the combustion of plutonium and uranium." by RF Carter, K Stewart in the journal Inhaled Part. There's no abstract at PubMed.

Olin 21:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Question

Is this you: Legion of Doom (hacking), James Salsman ('Karl Marx')? Torturous Devastating Cudgel 18:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One week block

I have blocked you for a week for violating your Arbcom parole. Please remember that you are banned from editing Depleted uranium and related articles, under any username. Thank you in advance for your absolute cooperation. Nandesuka 04:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

LossIsNotMore (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

my arbcom parole allows editing of talk pages; e.g. see Talk:Uranium trioxide which reads: 'The user is not prevented from discussing or proposing changes on this talk page.' User:Joke137's block for editing the talk page was inappropriate..

Please include a decline or accept reason.

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

[request reviewed] You were blocked (according to the talk page above, for editing the page not the talk page, and for doing it, it seems, from another account. Request denied.--JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I haven't, and I haven't even been accused of that since the previous block. Reviewing admin, would you please check with Joke137 about whether he is actually accusing me of editing a prohibited page instead of just a talk pages which I am allowed to edit? Thanks. LossIsNotMore 03:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The fruitless discussions on uranium-related talk pages are as disruptive as anything. Please move on. Dr Zak 04:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Dr Zak. At this point your unblock request has been reviewed. Your block expires in a week. Mango juice^talk 13:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salsman, Reddi, etc.

Please see User:Hillman/Digging for some hints of my policy concerns and why I am keeping some research notes. Please note that due to overreactions by some users, I haven't been able to complete my essay User:Hillman/Digging or to start others explaining my concerns wrt to quality control or my intention in keeping research notes. (Briefly: examples for said essays and so that I know what I'm talking about in future policymaking discussions). Please note however that my concerns are with quality control in Wikipedia articles and trying to get in place better policies for dealing with QC, and also for regulating procedures such as "digging" which are open to abuse. I have already found that most Wikipedians have no idea what I am talking about initially when I try to explain my concerns, so I need examples, and the notes are currently serving as examples for my essays (only one is semicomplete). It is unfortunate that some users apparently wish to prevent the open discussion of these problems; this kind of censorship is not in the best interest of Wikipedia. As you can see from my user page, I believe that the mission of constructing an encyclopedia ultimately trumps the privileges and even the "rights" of users, who are after all here voluntarily to help construct an encyclopedia.

As you can see from the current version, I have found very little time to look into the (more or less randomly chosen) case of User:Hillman/Dig/Salsman yet. And please don't freak out if you find yourself mentioned in User:Hillman/Dig/Reddi. If you have comments or concerns, please return to my user talk page.

It seems that Reddi did freak out, unfortunately assuming that I meant him harm, which is not the case. I have noted that that page actually provides considerable evidence that Reddi could use to defend himself against the occasional charge that he is a problem user. I expect that Reddi will ultimately serve in User:Hillman/Digging mostly as an example of a user with a distinctive thoughtprint, and for whatever reason, a lot of socks/anons, who often edits some articles which are often edited by many distinct anons. One of the points I would like to make if given the chance is that all of us who use large systems are subject to scrutiny by sysadmins, so we are all used to living in a glass house, whether or not we are aware of it. It is in the nature of wikis that the glass should be particularly transparent. Some users including myself feel that being subject to rather detailed scrutiny by any other user is actually in the spirit of wiki. You can see from User:Hillman/Dig that I feel that I myself have nothing to hide in regard to my own behavior at Wikipedia, and I hope the popularizing the concept of "digging" will help others decide to be on their best behavior here.

Fair enough?---CH 05:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LossIsNotMore: I now see that apparently you have stated in the past that you are IRL none other than James Salsman, a principal in the Uranium affair here at Wikipedia. I wish you had been more forthcoming about that when you left your message on my user talk page asking me for assistance in your dispute with another Wikipedian. Honesty is the best policy.---CH 06:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So I'll ask...

Why does it have to be gaseous uranium trioxide? Why can't people inhale some uranium oxide (whatever the substance) particles and that be harmful? The radiation doesn't care whether it's solid or liquid or gas or UO3 or U3O8 or UO2 or whatever. Why don't you pursue that, which doesn't require you to continue to suck up so much time on the uranium trioxide page? I just don't get it. Olin 21:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at User talk:Olin#Re: So I'll ask.... LossIsNotMore 23:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the vapor pressure paragraph what you want anyway? It has a reaction with oxygen, and, from your perspective as you said, you don't need that much gas anyway. (My concern with that would be the rate at which it becomes a solid/liquid upon cooling.) Why continue to push the point? Olin 17:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rules vs. accuracy (Moved from User talk:Hillman)

I would like to respect your wishes about discontinuing our discussion, but I am uncomfortable that your statement, "I do know that you are acting like a fanatic who believes that your single issue trumps all other concerns," borders on something of a personal attack, and I do think it is important to discuss this. If it were you, and the rules gave you a choice between conforming to them and correcting an inaccuracy, which would you choose? LossIsNotMore 04:52, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James, I already said that I have no interest in depleted uranium, and I have already said that I consider this subject closed, at least in my own user talk pages. There are other venues for you to pursue your agenda at Wikipedia. Thank you for your future cooperation with my request.---CH 19:52, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GFDL image?

Can you please provide a reference showing that the image you uploaded, Image:Len Tower.jpg, is in fact licensed under the GFDL? Thanks, Samsara (talk • contribs) 09:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assign use of this image Image:Len Tower.jpg to the Wikipedia Foundation under the GFDL. - Lentower 09:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://svn.wikimedia.org/doc/DifferenceEngine_8php-source.html is quite familiar, though evolved. I'm not too surprised that a better algorithm hasn't been found (well. I'm assuming they checked the Comp Sci and Math literature -- I haven't needed to). The problem had been well studied when rms and I designed GNU diff.
Without more context, or a picture, I'm not remembering you. Hope to see you again sometime in the non-virtual world. - Lentower 16:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Energy portal

Hi! As a contributor to WikiProject Energy, I thought you might like to be aware of the opportunity to contribute to the new Energy Portal, now that there is one... No need to reply. Gralo 17:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your educated people rant

Your rant is not cool, and it borders on a personal attack, even if it is not directed at anyone in particular. The educated people could make a similar rant against you, but then you would rightfully charge it is a personal attack. It is in poor taste as you don't give a specific person a chance to respond. Olin 23:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You insult me, and the other editors on the page for which I have respect, and make no amends or alterations at your comments, and then you expect me to go make a phone call? Your lack of good judgement astounds me, especially when combined with your insistence on including a reference that is self-contradictory with the very statement you want to include in the article.

You ask "[A]fter devoting so much time to this question . . . could you possibly have for not wanting to talk to him?" And I answer: Because an expert's verbal opinion is not a reliable source unless it is backed up by a third party source; it is an extraordinary claim, requiring a good peer reviewed source, as stated in the reliable sources page. It is a waste of my time to converse with "your expert," especialy since he may be pushing a POV as his spoken statements are not subject to the rigorous review of other experts. I have been clear again and again and again and again and again on this.

It is up to the editor who wished to include information to product a reference, not the other way around.

Furthermore, the vapor pressure is in the article, implying that UO₃ is a gas under those conditions. The information that UO₃ is a gas is in the article.Olin 16:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I had written, "You are simply unwilling to swallow your pride and face the fact that you are, and have always been, exactly wrong? Is that so hard to live with? Wouldn't it be easier to live with yourself if you know and can prove to the world that you can admit your mistakes and correct your errors?" you would call that a personal attack. Olin 19:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rostker (2000) is not a peer-reviewed scientific source, and Salbu has been refuted in the talk many times. Olin 19:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If UO2 melts at 2846.85 °C I have trouble believing that there is any substantial evidence for a gas of UO3. I'm a scientist. I need good, reliable data to support the existence of something. Olin 19:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James, you got some splainin to do!

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/LossIsNotMore, you have been busted again, so kindly stop. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 18:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Unrelated" Whew! Replied on TDC's talk, and a half-dozen other places. Certainly an improvement, but, when does this get to be fun again? LossIsNotMore 00:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Felix-car-batteries-full.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Felix-car-batteries-full.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Interiot 22:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Energy portal & future selected articles

Hi! Over the past couple of months I've been spending much more time than I should developing the Energy portal, and intend asking for a portal peer review within the next day or so.

The portal provides a showcase for energy-related articles on Wikipedia. One of the most prominent ways is via a the selected article that is currently changed every 6 weeks or so. It would be good to increase this turnover, and with three Wikiprojects dedicated to energy-related topics and a good number of articles already written, I'd like to suggest that members of each Wikiproject might like to use the 'selected article' to feature some of their best work.

With this in mind, I'd like to suggest that your Wikiproject bypasses the normal selected article nomination page and decides collectively which articles are worth featuring - or these may be self-evident from previous discussions - and add short 'introduction' to the selected article at the appropriate place on page Portal:Energy/Selected article/Drafts, which includes further information. Your personal involvement would be welcome!

Please make any comments on your Wikiproject talk page, my talk page, or on Portal talk:Energy/Selected article/Drafts, as appropriate. Gralo 15:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Blocked: I have blocked this account indefinitely as an alternate account of User:Nrcprm2026. As long as you are under ArbCom sanction, you should really only be using one account, and this one had been dormant most of the year. If you want to make this your permanent primary account, I will switch the blocks. Thatcher131 01:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]