User talk:Mmoneypenny

This user may have left Wikipedia. Mmoneypenny has not edited Wikipedia since February 2012. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Mmoneypenny is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome to my talk page. If I have started a discussion on your talk page (this happens a lot) I will watch your page and reply there. If you leave me a message here I will reply here. This makes life easier all around and keeps the flow of conversations together. Ta muchly. Mmoneypenny

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Dear Mmoneypenny: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any discussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 22:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "joke"

Well done on a tasteful edit. It is good you do not share an anonymous editor's humour on fourteen year old gilrs. Rintrah 12:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Novel on your talk page

Someday you might have one (a novel) on your talk page, with the help of a struggling writer, if you make the vain promise you will submit it to a publisher. I was thinking of writing a novel about snakes... and a plane — yes! That's it! No someone has already used that concept. Rintrah 16:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parkinsons Disease

Nice editting; do you have a particular interest in this topic or are you cleaning up our sometimes clumsy language? I note at one point you worried a bit about stepping on toes - the best route to go therefore is to propose changes on the discussion page. There's enough active editors that you'll get a pretty quick response. The topic page has a turbulent history since Feb of this year, when a person with an agenda came on board as the world's foremost PD expert and eliminated everything not written by himself, since it wasn't up to his standards. His presence has been diminished but he still appears from time to time in sockpuppet form, so we're a bit touchy about sudden extensive bouts of editting from someone new. But if your intentions are honorable, welcome. We will correct you if needed - for instance, the Rotterdam study used Copiah county survey technique, not California - they couldn't, because the California study was done in a large closed system HMO. --Dan 18:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Bush

I have deprodded the above article because I feel that there should be some discussion via before the article is deleted. Feel free to nomiate the article on AfD if you so chose. As for the note on the articles talk page, please refrain from telling people not to remove prod tags without a good reason. When we create "prod" a few months ago, the whole point was that anyone could object for any reason that they wished without harrassment from the nominator. It was meant to cut down on the clutter of AfD, but still allow for AfDs where any user, even an anon, so desired. I hope this clears that topic up.

I see that you still relatively new to the 'pedia and I would like to commend you for your vast array of edits thusfar. Its good to have more people like you on board. If you have any questions or need any help in the future, or would just like a pair of disinterested eyes to take a look at an article at some point, feel free to drop me a note. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 15:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Check out your user page. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 15:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I will comment on AfD. The way "prod" works is that any user is free to remove the tag, so that the issue can be discussed. --Russ Blau (talk) 15:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blood type

Hi Mmoneypenny, thanks for your comments. I've started a discussion about IgM here as you suggested, you may like to comment. --apers0n 05:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carbon capture and storage

Re: rv on Carbon capture and storage (edit:[1]). You just removed a whole section with that edit, presumably by mistake. Keep up the countervandalism work, but please be careful when you revert vandalism. Jens Nielsen 16:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woops! Looks like I was reverting a revert. Too trigger-happy (and wrist slapping all around!)Mmoneypenny 16:13, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

British spellings are OK too!

Thanks for your edits of Anaesthesia awareness. You have carefully changed every version of anaesthetic to anesthetic (and so on), which is quite needless. This sort of thing causes irritation to those of us who live in countries where the article was correctly spelt. I like to think (and I understand that the official line is) that Wikipedia is neither American nor British, and therefore either spelling is acceptable. I don't go around changing American spellings I come across Wikipedia, but I am going to revert your changes.

Your other changes to the article are perfectly reasonable, and I won't revert these.

I fear this may be a losing battle, however. See the Talk pages in the Dentin article for more discussion. Preacherdoc 21:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to this on Preacherdoc's talk page.Mmoneypenny 17:36, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For hard work and dedication to Wikipedia (particularly, you great work with the USMC page), I award you this Original Barnstar. Enjoy! Sharkface217 23:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'ello

Since you seem to be interested in counter-vandalism, I would like to suggest Lupin's excellent anti-vandal tool. It's not perfect, but it helps us fight the entropy natural in a system, especially that of WP, hmm? Anyhow, thought I'd give you a tip; we need all the help we can get. Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 21:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some help?

Hi Mmoneypenny,

Found you from some of your edits on the BBC article on todays frontpage. Wondered if you might not mind helping out with some third party opinions and moderation on Great Commission Association. It looks like you'd be able to be neutral and you seem to be completely unattached from the issues there. We've been having some small-scale revision wars for the last several months and we're inviting other unrelated editors to come have a look-see and pose some suggestions and help enforce some guidelines. Would you mind? Nswinton 20:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted one of your edits. The "fact" in question was a matter of official policy, necessitating a date concurrent with its inclusion for accuracy. Policies of course may change at any time, and changes in policy can themselves be notable. ClaudeReigns 08:20, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Wikipedia is about doing your own thing (and "using" "quotes" whenever "you" feel like it!) :-) Mmoneypenny 09:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for stopping by, Mmoneypenny! Nswinton 14:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Serlmano

You think it's time someone reported User:Serlmano? He's already gotten several warnings and the only reason he's not blocked seems to be because he waits two weeks before going on trolling sprees. -WarthogDemon 06:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If by "someone" (those darned quotes again!) you mean you, be my guest. Serlmano's on my watchlist (can't remember why) and I don't think he deserves reporting because, as you say, his edits are sporadic and, from reading his contribs, he does make the occasional good edit. Hope that helps. Mmoneypenny 19:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prostacyclin and thromboxane

Hi there. I just noticed a question you asked on the Science Reference Desk on the 12th, regarding Image:Prostanoid synthesis.svg, which I created. I'd like to say that, as Nunh-huh and JWSchmidt pointed out, there was indeed an error in the image. It's fixed now, and I apologize for any confusion I may have caused. Sorry again and happy editing, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update. Next time I see what might be an error I should really find out who made/uploaded the image and ask them directly. Still finding my feet I guess. Mmoneypenny 08:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, in my book you did the right thing. I'm still embarrassed by my mistake :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries and hey I wouldn't be embarrassed, we are all human (I think) and making those diagrams takes a lot more work than my spell checking etc. So keep up the good work!Mmoneypenny 13:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet

WP:RFCU. But I have already taken the necessary steps. JFW | T@lk 16:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not feel intimidated by this strange behaviour. I've blocked most of the sockpuppets that were reverting your edits. Let me know if others come out of the woodwork.

As you may have seen on WP:TOJO, this is a very complicated specimen of Homo sapiens sapiens. He claims his website is much better than the Wikipedia article, yet starts edit wars over fully established facts just because he cannot integrate them into his thought system about Parkinson's. At the moment, his self-claimed intellectual and moral superiority is not self-evident from his edits. His claims that there is "no evidence" for this or that should be regarded as WP:NOR.

I seem to be his bête noire, probably because I am somewhat prone to hyperphagia trollificans. JFW | T@lk 01:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apple Inc.

A request for mediation for a dispute regarding Apple, Inc. has been posted on Mediation Cabal. You can see the full listing at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-04-20 Apple Inc.. You have been listed as an involved party to the issue. I am offering my time and services to assist with this issue. Please let me know if you are willing to accept my offer for mediation, I have posted a notice on Talk:Apple Inc., please reply there. Thank you! Arkyan  ^(talk) 17:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

You're welcome :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. Enigma3542002 13:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you're welcome too!Mmoneypenny 13:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sculpture gardens, trails and parks

Dear Mmoneypenny, why should I delete a link to the above category on the Userpage of User:Doug Coldwell? Well, it contains the same article as the listed article:Brookgreen Gardens. Why should the name of the User appear in the same list as his article itself. And... the User named it Sandbox 16, which speaks for itself. Or not? greetings --GerardusS 14:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After reading that through a couple of times... yes, it speaks for itself!Mmoneypenny 21:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the third reading... Why not include an edit summary that tells me this? Why not revert my revert? Mmoneypenny 21:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have done this and had a chat with User:Doug Coldwell. All is well with the world. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. Must stop talking to myself.Mmoneypenny 22:31, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for cleaning up the vandalism on my user page I appreciate it. King Lopez ^Contribs 02:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and you're welcome.Mmoneypenny 05:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hemoglobin images

Remember, we're now all being asked to take out the "px" setting in images, and allow our personal readers to set that for us, so all images in an article come out the same size. If you've got yours set too high (look at your "my preferences") like 300 vs the recommended 180, then a lot of pics which support 300 will crowd your screen more than you'd like. ALso, the onces that don't have enough detail to be 300 px wide or long will come out odd size, and small. But fix that on YOUR end, not in the wiki.

I'll do my best to make two pics of hemoglobin at 180px come out without shoving the sigmoid curve too far down. But we really need two pics of hemoglobin motion at least as much as the sigmoid curve. S B H arris 22:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that we are removing the px settings. I also appreciate that we can set the thumbnail size in our preferences (this is set at 180 for me) but I hope you appreciate that a framed image will always be displayed at its full size and the px command will not affect it, so this is not something I can change at my end. (Regardless of this and slightly unrelated, most people browse wikipedia without being logged in and they cannot set a preference.) Lastly, do we really really need two pics of hemoglobin motion? IMO we are trying to make people appreciate that there is a motion (as explained in the text) and the first pic shows this quite well, the second pic adds the other 2 chains but removes the oxygen... Surely if people read the text and appreciate that Hb consists of four chains and (as the first pic states) we are only showing one, that is enough? I see that the two images are now at the top of the subheading with some text shoved in between them, this still IMO looks bad. The result is an extra pic but a messy article. When I've got a bit more time I'll see if I can play around with the pics a bit more. All the best.Mmoneypenny 08:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hemoglobin article

{{helpme}} Having trouble with the Hemoglobin article, in particular the binding of ligands [2] section. Another editor has inserted a picture and, although it would be nice to keep both, neither of us are experts at placing images and now the article looks a bit crap. (Plus the "Contents" section at the top has

3 Binding of ligands

3.1 ==================================================================)

in order to make the images fit. Anybody able to give a hand?Mmoneypenny 20:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I rearranged it. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 20:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome :) —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 20:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Simulated Reality

The point about these edits is that time after time this issue has been raised, and ^{[citation needed]} tags are removed by one of the editors. I am getting exasperated with the fact that these issues are not addrssed. I have students who are quoting this as fact, and I need some way of flagging to them that this is opinion, not fact. --TonyFleet 08:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see comment above. I know what the concention is, and I have begun to create an alternative article at Simulism which, I believe will be a great improvement. However, the two other authors on this project seem hell-bent on a battle, and are wedded to the original article. I just feel that its obvious deficiences need flagging up. --TonyFleet 08:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can see what you are trying to do, but you should not add commentary to talk pages. It will also weaken your arguments about the worthiness of this article if you do not look like you are following normal procedures, such as asking for mediation in your disagreements.Mmoneypenny 08:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I lay you a pound to a penny that your last edit to this page will be reverted by one of the other editors.--TonyFleet 08:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with almost all of your edits to this page, and I have considered doing this myself. However, can I ask you to follow the WP guidelines and justify why, exactly you have done what you have done what you have done in gerneral and more specific terms on the talk page. I have a feeeling that otherwise another one of the editors of this page will call it vandalism, and simply revert your edits and we will be back to square one. In addition, I would have thought the convention was to remove all such chunks of deleted text to the talk page? --TonyFleet 09:54, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have done this. A few things: 1) Wikipedia asks us to be bold and I tend to look at the cycle that this brings about as a good thing in an article which has become such a quagmire with little or no references, 2) there is no convention of shifting chunks of text onto the talk page and 3) Wikipedia tells us what vandalism is, my changes do not fit the criteria, but I would be more than happy to discuss this.Mmoneypenny 11:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tajima's D Introduction

Thanks for the suggestion, I wrote an introduction for Tajima's D, please let me know if you find it readable Jlrflores 22:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Highland Free Press

On one of my on-line browses I stumbled across wikipedia and, to my surprise, found an entry on the West Highland Free Press, a newspaper based on the Isle of Skye. This entry, posted during December 2004, was inaccurate, misleading, and grammatically poor. It also, in my view, infringed on the intellectual property of the West Highland Free Press.

I therefore edited and updated the listing to one which was, not only accurate and grammatically sound, but also a verbatim repeat of the Company’s “Official” corporate identity statement: an identity the West Highland Free Press is proud of and jealously guards.

However, this listing has been edited several times by a user in wikipedidom to something other than we, ourselves (the entity to which the article refers), posted. Now this edit isn’t dreadful and mercifully it’s grammatically sound, but it is not how the West Highland Free Press wants to be listed.

If, as a legally recognised entity, we cannot control our identity and intellectual property, we would prefer not to be listed at all. Moreover, I would think this situation provides wikipedia with a moral and legal dilemma over its content and editing policy. --Whfp 10:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for getting in touch. If I can cover each point in turn:

1) I am sorry that, in your view, the article infringed on the intellectual property of the WHFP. However having read through the article, I find this very difficult to believe, as there is no indication that the article, before your edits, contained anything of the sort. It contained remarks which you may have felt were disparaging or untruthful, e.g.

Perhaps not surprisingly, given that it was founded by a Labour politician, it almost exclusively supports Labour, 
and which has earned it a disparaging nickname: West Highland Free Pravda.

2) Thank you for editing the article, although please see WP:COI which states that: "conflict of interest edits are strongly discouraged." I am happy for you that you are proud of and jealously guard your identity.

3) As this is Wikipedia, "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", your article will be edited by others and will change from what you posted.

4) In my opinion you cannot "control" your "identity and intellectual property" on Wikipedia.

Lastly, wikipedia has faced this problem (articles with which the subject/employee/legal dept of company disagree) innumerable times before. You can get further help here [3].

Hope this has helped, all the best. Mmoneypenny 12:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find portions of your reply condescending, this apart.

The trade name West Highland Free Press, and the numerous rights associated with it, is the intellectual property of the West Highland Publishing Company Limited. There can be no doubt, a trade name or trademark is intellectual property. Therefore, the use of the trademark or trade name without our permission infringes our intellectual property rights. The article would not have made contextual sense without the use of our mark, therefore, the article also, in my view, infringed our intellectual property.

Being publishers of a newspaper (one of the few remaining independent newspaper titles in Scotland) ethos, identity, political orientation, history and editorial standpoint are crucial factors in what makes a newspaper, well, a newspaper. They are as important to a newspaper, as the ingredients that differentiate leading soft-drink brands.

My contention is our view of ourselves in time and place is what defines us: newspapers, historians, biographers and philosophers only exist in this context, otherwise they merely become conveyers of fact or data, the world would be devoid of comment.

Your edit has changed the meaning of who we (the West Highland Free Press) are, what we stand for and what we represent. Again, as I’ve said, we would rather not be listed than have who we are changed.

Nor do I believe that anything I posted presented or was influenced by a conflict of interest. More of a conflict of interest exists by adherence of an editor to an editing standard, when an editor has a say in shaping that editing standard.

--81.139.11.225 13:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you find portions of my reply condescending. I believe that your view on the use of "West Highland Free Press" as infringement of intellectual property by Wikipedia as the title of an article is erroneous, it would mean that we couIdn't have articles on Microsoft, Hoover, etc., etc. Why not read the intellectual property article? Lastly, I hope you appreciate that I am but an editor on Wikipedia, not even an administrator. I can only re-refer you to the link above which will place you in touch with the higher powers. All the best. Mmoneypenny 14:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In relation to an article or entry solely about the West Highland Free Press we have asked that our name is not used, or is at least used as we would like it to be; with the text as we have appended. You have changed some and deleted other portions. This is vastly different from a right to reply or the information we are geniunely trying to submit being disputed in open debate.

There does not seem to be any choice in this matter. We have no say in how or even if we are listed, but we cannot stop the listing, validate it or change it to reflect what we, as the subject matter, believe is an accurate, fair and valid description of ourselves.

This seems rather perverse and a wholly unsatisfactory method of gathering validated, orginal source material. Whfp 15:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Dear reader, additional info re: this discussion and its resolution can be found at [[4]].) Mmoneypenny 12:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikithesia

Hi, I have noted your contributions to the wikipedia. I wanted to contact you about the website that I am developing called wikithesia. You can contact me at webmaster@wikithesia.com Look forward to hearing from you soon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.5.82 (talk) 20:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Bloom copyvio tagged

You seem to have been interested in the Benjamin Bloom article. i've copyvio tagged it - see Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2011_June_15. My present guess is that a copyvio expert may decide to revert to this version of 17:55, 22 October 2008 by Max711, i.e. deleting all 80 or so subsequent edits, and the article would then be safe to work on. But go to Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2011_June_15 to follow the discussion. Boud (talk) 08:09, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]