User talk:Richard L. Peterson

Bases in chemistry

In response to your e-mail questioning the term matrix in reference to the etymology of bases in chemistry: I have checked the cited source document which is a short article by William Jensen in the Journal of Chemical Education. The quotation in the article is correct, so Jensen does say that Paracelsus did use the word matrix. Although since Paracelsus was a 16th-century Swiss German, he presumably used some German or perhaps Latin word for which matrix is a modern English translation. In any case the word matrix has so many meanings that I don't think there is any reason to be suspicious of its use here.

It is true however, that the 2-word phrase the matrix in the line before the quote was inserted by a Wikipedia editor and is not in Jensen's article. So perhaps if you think it sounds too much like a sci-fi movie reference, we could replace the matrix by just matrix.

Dirac66 (talk) 12:21, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Richard L. Peterson. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Richard L. Peterson. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

James Clark McReynolds

I note your recent additions, which have been undone. I am not surprised that he supported White supremacy and lynching. Needs a WP:RS. I encourage you to add sources and get this out in the open. i'd be glad to help. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For intrepid dedication to the truth of the matter. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:32, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charles Koch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stephen Moore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Richard L. Peterson. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Section heading problem?

Hi Richard L. Peterson. I saw this edit you made to United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, but it's not clear what you're trying to do. You might want to check MOS:GOODHEAD for reference, but typically level-three section headings should not come before level-2 headings. For all practical purposes, level-2 headings are reserved for the main sections of an article, with level-3 and lower being used for subsections of main sections. So, if you were trying to add a section heading higher than level-2 (e.g. level-1) then you probably want to reconsider that since level-1 headings are reserved for article titles (page titles) and shouldn't be used within the body of the article. Moreover, trying to add a new heading, particularly to an article about what might be considered a fairly contentious subject given current events, might be something to be WP:CAUTIOUS about than WP:BOLD about so as to make sure there's a consensus to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Hello, I'm Cogaidh. I wanted to let you know that some of your recent contributions to Dion DiMucci have been reverted or removed because they seem to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please use unbiased terminology when referring to people or their works. ℭ𝔬𝔤𝔞𝔦𝔡𝔥 (talk) 19:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cogaidh, I appreciate your good intentions, and it is understandable that you are concerned about defamation and libel. But check out the lyrics, they very directly and very strongly support the adjectives I inserted. Cheers.Rich (talk) 03:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Richard L. Peterson Regardless of the lyrical content of the song, I believe adjectives such as "hateful" and especially "shallow" are much too far from a neutral POV for Wikipedia and seek to malign Dion. I have no opinion on the lyrics or the singer but the terminology seems unsuitable. ℭ𝔬𝔤𝔞𝔦𝔡𝔥 (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cogaidh, regardless of whether you think the adjectives are too far from neutral, seek to malign Dion, and are unsuitable, could you read the lyrics of Runaround Sue and The Wanderer? To work with you on this, it will help to be on the "same page." Regards,Rich (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Richard L. Peterson I know the lyrics to both of these songs very well, however like I said the particular terminology you used does not fit a neutral POV. I have no issue with you addressing that idea of thought in regard to his songs but the words you used are unsuitable. ℭ𝔬𝔤𝔞𝔦𝔡𝔥 (talk) 19:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

you say you know the lyrics very well. Yet you suggested my adjectives were defamatory or libelous?Rich (talk) 00:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i just vandalized your user page

replaced x with ×. as it was confusing as hell in equations. bc 6x = 2 + 4 is also valid equation. sorry :) and no, i cannot help with editing article By his bootstraps, as smart as i am. bit dumbuser still in technicalities. but would like to chime in with spoiler thingy. wikip and encyclopedias are in this case like literature textbooks. there is lots of authors in curriculum one has to know about, but not read all they wrote. so the textbook gives outlines, in full, ending as well, of their books. so, people who need to know about book or film before reading, or refresh memories after, go to wikip. for spoilers, if you like to call them so. so, wikipedia main page has mentally sub-title 'spoilers here', and no need to put disclaimers on every article about book or film. - i personally like so called spoilers; if thing is not worth reading twice, it is not worth reading at all. meaning, spoilers do not really spoil real thing - if they do, thing is nor real good. BirgittaMTh (talk) 16:28, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, and thanks for improving my user page. Best, Rich (talk) 18:04, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited IBT Media, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matthew Cooper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lamar Alexander, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill Hagerty.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

James Stout edit

You inserted a "dubious" notice for his photo. You appeared to be right but then I found that it is in fact him.Stretchrunner II (talk) 12:48, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/70852253/james-stout

thank you Rich (talk) 04:02, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting some article expansion help

Greetings @ Richard L. Peterson

Hi,

I am Bookku, I do initiate drafts and articles in the topic areas where I find information and knowledge gap and try to recruit and promote related articles and drafts for expansion. Came across your interesting user profile from Reference desk/Humanities.

Requesting your kind visit to the following articles/ drafts (out of my ever getting longer list) and requesting your help in expanding the topics you feel interested in.

There is one copy edit request too

Draft:Ex-Muslims of Kerala

Thanks and warm regards

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 12:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

placement of replies

To your difficulty on the Ref Desk. How are you posting your replies? If you hit the 'reply' button after the signature, it should go in the right place. Do you not see a 'reply' button? (It is rather new, so maybe not available on some interfaces.) In olden times not only did I have to walk uphill both ways in snow, I had to get my cursor where it needed to be by hand, and count out the appropriate number of colons; are you doing it that way and having some trouble? —Tamfang (talk) 03:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks :-> Rich (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SBF's BLP article

Please don't insert "supposedly" when there are multiple WP:RS WP:NPOV sources as corroboration.

Also, on your user page, it isn't great to categorically ridicule the beliefs of all Christians, Muslims, and Jews. Just saying, but that's up to you. This isn't true btw: "while Judaism uses flattery/vanity(“chosenness”)to get its followers." The entire chosenness thing is a burdensome list of 612 (or maybe 613? I forget) rules that must be followed. So yes, oh joy, we've been chosen to follow them. It would be a lot easier not to follow them. I first heard the expression, "chosen people" from not-Jews when I was 15 years old. Also, we don't proselytize or try to "make more Jews" so to speak. If one's mother is Jewish, then it gets passed along, but lots of people for whom that is the case choose not to be Jewish. One may opt-out ... unless one is not allowed, e.g. Germany during WW2 but ugh let's not get into that.-- FeralOink (talk) 15:18, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FP, there's a difference between what was my "supposedly" meant and what you thought it meant. At the time of my edit, Bankman-Fried had recently said in an interview that he had contributed just as much to Republicans as to Democrats, but the money to Republicans was thru "dark money." That's what the "supposedly " meant. If you look at the the article version at that time, you will see this information was stated, and cited, but unfortunately not in the lede. So my insertion was not contradicting any corroborated sources, ther was later information after those sources. It is unfortunate that the claim that Bankman-Fried donated mainly to Democrats was so heavily weighing on the lede, so my "supposedly" was a worthy counterbalance.Rich (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not and do not ridicule the beliefs of any religion!Rich (talk) 00:11, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For easy reference, see here:

8.) Objectivism uses selfishness to get followers. Christianity and Islam use bribes and threats of heaven and hell to get followers, while Judaism uses flattery/vanity(“chosenness”)to get its followers. Well, I’m not perfect either, and I admit that the last three of the above creeds are morally inspiring. Maybe Objectivism has features that are morally inspiring also.

FP, these are my impressions, correct or incorrect, that might or might not strike a chord with others, and then bring about further understanding, thru discussion. So I appreciate your response. Best regards, Rich (talk) 10:30, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rich! I am FeralOink on Wikipedia but you wrote "FP" in the familiar-ish way, which delights me! That's because you associated Oink with my beloved *PIGGIES*! (It could have been a typo, because the letter o is adjacent to the letter p on the keyboard. Thoughts of friendly oinks and pigs warms my cold heart. Thank you for that. Yes, I am Jewish so I try my best not to eat them. I love their wiggly pink intelligence comparable to my now-deceased good dog, a German Shorthaired Pointer.) I digress: I fretted that I was too harsh with my comment. Thank you for not reacting with fury. There's lots of reactions with fury on Wikipedia, believe me!

Next, re SBF, his political donations didn't even need to be in the BLP opening, but that's not your fault. It is sleazy behavior (the quid pro quo aspect of his effective altruism) but everything known about SBF is morally compromised. My left-wing and my right-wing acquaintances are equally incensed about him, and predict a revolt of outraged proletariat if SBF isn't prosecuted and punished for his fraudy misdeeds. As the days pass, and he remains ensconced in the Bahamas, I worry that American judicial powers will choose not to act. Turks have less sangfroid, thank God, and have seized all the SBF's assets in Turkey and began a criminal investigation of FTX Turkey. Caroline was sighted two days ago, buying expensive cappuccino in Manhattan. Thank you for explaining your reasoning about the "supposedly" part. Now I understand your thought processes.

You're probably right about Objectivism not being great. I can't find anything morally inspiring about Objectivism, and am totally with you on that. Lots of people far, far to the left of me also find Rationalism of the Less Wrong variety to be annoying and silly. I associate Objectivism with Rationalism and the Less Wrong crowd. They all lack compassion. I'm glad that we had this chat. I wish you and your open minded demeanor the very best, and look forward to seeing you around Wikipedia!--FeralOink (talk) 20:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

doggone it!!! i just realized 2 minutes ago that i put fp not fo, and raced over here! too late. take care, Rich (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On a Dark Night

Hi RLP! Here's everything from newspapers.com for ["on a dark night" + "anthony west"].

Western Mail, 19 October 1949, a long paragraph
Daily Herald, 19 October 1949, full review
Daily Telegraph, 21 October 1949, three paragraphs
The Guardian, 6 December 1949, a short sentence
Daily Telegraph, 30 December 1949, a sentence
The Observer, 1 January 1950, a couple sentences from one author, a passing mention by another

That's about halfway through the results. I left out a library catalog mention and some ads. More to come. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:50, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Evening Standard, 28 September 1949, pre-publication info, from a segment titled "The Londoner's Diary"

Western Morning News, 27 October 1949, a paragraph

Sunday Mercury, 11 December 1949, listed as a recommended book for Christmas

The Observer, 29 January 1950, mentions the book being banned by "the censors in Eire"

The Age, 24 November 1941, one paragraph, meta-analysis on reception, rest is about White's next book

New York Times, 28 December 1987, a paragraph in the obituary, temporary free access link

I left out some bare mentions in a couple more obituaries. They tend to mention year of publication, alt name, and the Houghton award.

If you're looking for more, ["the vintage" + "anthony west"] gets 177 hits from 1949–1950. That's more than I'd like to work through, but I'm willing to look through the 15 results for ["the vintage" "anthony west" "wallis" "von kenelm"], which are likely to be more full reviews. Let me know if that'd help! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very very much! It's the kind of reviews I need to understand where I am(positive) in the range of responses to the novel and pointed out things I didn't understand. You're a terrific reference desker! Rich (talk) 06:00, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

zWhat you've already done is ample! now that i know that others reacted mainly similarly to me and some differently, i can mojve oon to other books, some, of course, by Anthony West. thank you again! Rich (talk) 06:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help! Are you interested in writing an article about the book? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 06:04, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

that would be neat to do, but i had better not put my time into it..sorry. Rich (talk) 06:15, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! I might go for it eventually and didn't want to step on any toes. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 06:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rebecca Burkes (April 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Pythoncoder was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Rebecca Burkes and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 03:09, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you just give my some time to get those sources? Rich (talk) 05:11, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Richard L. Peterson! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 03:09, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i already posted my question here and i expect a reply at least as prompt as your summary rejection.Rich (talk) 05:20, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Rebecca Burkes

Hello, Richard L. Peterson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Rebecca Burkes, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:01, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to let you know this was updated and submitted by another editor and has now been accepted. KylieTastic (talk) 16:48, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
messed up. Don't any of these deleters realize how rude they are? On their pages they typically grouse about how angry the victims of their highhanded unthinking decisions get. The patronizing "Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing" doesn't help. Aand pythoncoder called me a new editor, yet. 09:34, 22 October 2023 (UTC) Rich (talk) 09:34, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]