User talk:Russell E/archive

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I find useful

Cheers, Sam [Spade] 03:23, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hi a belated welcome to wikipedia. I see you're doing/will be doing some major rewritting of polarization. That's great, it really needs it (the current article is a mishmash of about 5 people's attempts at explaining it). I do like your illustrations, also. (The only nitpick I have is that I think some of the mathematical treatment might be better off in Jones calculus or similar, but you do as you think best.) Good luck, and be bold! -- DrBob 18:14, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Entheogen

Good job at Entheogen! It's genuinely neutral and accurate. Wetman 00:51, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad we were able to converge on something mutually agreeable and neutral. Rkundalini 11:22, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Post-Roman christianity?

Hi, just wanted to query your edit to entheogen. My knowledge of history is terrible but from what I understand, e.g. from the Inquisition entry, is that the persecution of heresies began when Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire, and that nothing particular changed in the structure of the catholic church with the decline of the Empire, indeed even today it is still the "roman catholic church". So I don't really understand what you mean by your qualifying the setence with "post-Roman Christianity", would you mind explaining? Rkundalini 09:08, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Sorry I had totally overlooked your comment on that edit. I am glad you let it stand like that I guess its relatively obvious:"The use of entheogens (other than the Eucharist) in Europe was all but eliminated with the rise of post Roman Christianity". I am simply without much proof assuming that Jesus was indeed the crest of the psychadelic (entheogenic) 'Messias Wave'. The one who offered it to everybody at parties and healed with it. And of course I also continue to assume that the first followers of Jesus who had to do their Underground Movement where also really experienced. What do you think ? I further gather that it took thoes 400+ Years till the followers had forgotten to party really intensively and Rome was also at the end where then the puristic phase of Burning Books maybe implies the situation that edited sentence Kontextualizes? Togo 06:56, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Polarization

Hi there, I'm extremely grateful for your article on Polarization. But can you please explain what the theta's and a's in the formula given for the Jones vector denote. I'm completly new to this subject.

I have added a sentence of clarification, hope it helps. If the idea of complex numbers representing the amplitude and phase of a wave is new to you, perhaps see: complex number and Euler's formula (and maybe Phasor (electronics)). --Russell E 23:18, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Polarization is a useful entry! I do have a question/observation. I don't understand your reference to spinors -- aren't photons spin 1?

MattSzy  14:42, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

You are quite right. I don't know what I was thinking...! Rkundalini 15:03, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Wikisophia

Sorry for the inconvenience; we're back up and should have a CVS shortly. In the mean time, try wikipedia@sourceforge. Danenberg 11:33, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Image:Tryptamine.png

The tryptamine image (Image:Tryptamine.png) on your user page is an uploaded file from me. I think your upload has been overwritten due to a wikipedia glitch and your original image has been lost. You may change the image and remove my text because the tryptamine article links to Image:Tryptamine_structure.png.

The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Unverified images

Hi. You uploaded Image:Betacarboline.png but did not list any source and/or copyright information on the image description page. Please mark it either as GFDL or public domain. See Image copyright tags for more info. Please note that images without copyright information may be deleted in the future. Thanks. RedWolf 22:35, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Image:Phenethyalmine.png

Image:Phenethyalmine.png seems to have had an error whilst uploading, as it is 0 bytes. It has been listed for deletion for this reason. IF you still have a copy of the image, could you please re-upload it, unless you have already done so with a different filename.
Thank you
Boffy b 19:42, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)

Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs

Hello, this article has been up for Featured Article Candidacy for some time. I noticed you were the one who added the text about the Single Convention to the Prohibition (drugs) article, and thought you might be interested. A few more votes are needed to reach consensus on this article. Thanks, 24.54.208.177 01:41, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Getting Psychotherapy into This Week's Improvement Drive

Hi there! I noticed that at one time or another you helped contribute to the article on Psychotherapy. As it stands this article could use a lot of help, and thus I've taken the liberty of trying to get it to be the focus of a week's improvement drive. All we need to get it for a week's worth of focus and improvement is enough votes, so go to Psychotherapy's vote page and help out this very needing article! JoeSmack (talk) 18:16, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Entheogen

Yikes, good catch! Isn't it a shame, though, that we're not "permitted" to wrap those little ToC boxes in text and that people like User:SimonP an Admin have the leisure and confidence to go through and revert them, one after the other big pointless blank spaces and all? I define vandalism as "intentional defacement" actually. --Wetman 07:14, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heheh I didn't think you were into that crackpot stuff :). Re TOC: well guess his intention wasn't to deface, as in his view he's improving it. I don't see how having all that blank space is an improvement though! (But really we also shouldn't have to put hacky layout code in like that, the software should render the page without it by default ... I suppose this has already been discussed in great length on some community page I don't have time to read though!!) -- Rkundalini 13:07, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply (re Huxley article) from J. Russ

Hi, saw you have been making a series of improvements to the Aldous Huxley entry. I'd be interested in hearing what you think of the pair of comments I made down the bottom of Talk:Aldous Huxley. I think the article gives the wrong impression in a couple points but don't really consider myself qualified to make that judgement definitively. Rkundalini

Hi. I had a "New Messages" note when I logged on this morning, and as it was said to be from you - and related to the Aldous Huxley article - I followed the note you left (as copied, above). However, the A.H. "Talk" page didn't seem to show any new entries by yourself. I'll say, though,that the comments you have left in previous months all make good sense. Please clarify, if you like. Sorry if I'm missing something obvious.

You feel the article gives the wrong impression in a couple of points? That may very well be the case. Please specify. Maybe we can improve the article.

Rewrites

The History of Melbourne article was very poor. It consisted of my older article Foundation of Melbourne with a few paragraphs tacked on about later events. I have now written a proper article.
The Indigenous Australians was renamed from Australian Aborigine after a discussion at the Australian notice board page. I took the opportunity to split the article in two (the second article awaits writing) and write expanded material. The old article contained much good material, but also some unnecessary digressions, and it lacked coherence and structure. This is a chronic problem at Wikipedia, where many articles consist of agggregations of factoids added by many editors rather than coherent narratives. In my opinion all "big subject" articles benefit from periodic clean-outs and re-writes by single authors.
In both cases, a comparative reading of the current and previous versions will demonstrate what I have added and deleted.

Adam 08:15, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Changing username

Hi - Some time ago, you left a request on Wikipedia:Changing username. This facility is now up and running again. Are you still interested in changing your name? If so, please confirm at Wikipedia:Changing username. thanks, Warofdreams talk 13:31, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your request has been completed. Regards — Dan | Talk 02:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Russell E 02:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Polarization pictures

Hey there. A while ago you uploaded:

Image:Circular polarization schematic.png
Image:Elliptical polarization schematic.png
Image:Linear polarization schematic.png

And put a PD tag on them. However, this tag is now obsolete, and since there is no discription I'm not sure how to retag them. I assume you created them, and intend to release them as PD? If so could you change them to {{PD-self}}? Or you can just state your intent here, or on my page, and I can retag them.

Anyway, thanks for your time! --Falcorian ^(talk) 07:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ellipticity and polarization

Hi Russell. In this edit from two years ago, to the polarization article, you asserted that ellipticity is used to describe polarization in preference to the more common geometrical concept of eccentricity, because the latter "is of limited physical meaning in the case of polarization." Another editor has questioned this assertion at Talk:Polarization#eccentricity/ellipticity. Your input to this discussion would be much appreciated.--Srleffler 03:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cabal Mediation

I'm mediating your cabal mediation case regarding the editing of the World Hunting Association page. Hop over there and take a look at what I've found, and add any comments or concerns you have. I've contacted the involved parties about this, so hopefully we can get this mediated. If not, we can just get the page protected. If you have any concerns that you would like to address with me, feel free to so on my talk page! Lau ren 21:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worldhunt

It is my opinion that a case like this should not be brought to WP:AIV, rather dispute resolution should be used. Basically an admin looking at AIV will not have the time to go back to decide if this is a content issue rather than a vandalism issue. If it is a content issue he'd rather move on to clear and block the next obvious vandal before he causes more damage. OTOH once the dispute resolution process has been completed you might have a case judgement to refer to.

I am leaving the entry up on AIV just in case someone passing has a different opinion. Agathoclea 10:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help.--Russell E 22:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Birefringence.svg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Birefringence.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Nv8200p talk 03:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image licensing problem

Could you please retag your images with a proper tag? I noticed that many of your images (which are easily found at this link) use deprecated {{PD}} tags. Could you please retag them with {{Pd-self}} if they are entirely from your work, and {{GFDL-no-disclaimers}} if the source code for generating the images came from Wikisophia? Wikisophia's contents are released under the GFDL without disclaimers, so you must tag images generated from their source code with {{GFDL-no-disclaimers}}. Tagging them with {{GFDL}} violates the GFDL because it requires you to preserve the attached disclaimers, and Wikisophia carries no disclaimers. Thanks.

The reason there is a problem is that the {{PD}} tag does not say anything about the image source. {{Pd-self}} implies that you created it. Jesse Viviano 22:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I was able to force the MediaWiki software to rerender your SVGs correctly by purging those pages, forcing the server to regenerate the image and the page. To do so, click the "edit this page" tab, and then replace the string "edit" in the url with the string "purge", and hit return. This will force the rerendering of the image, and the SVG renderer here is much more robust. Jesse Viviano 22:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Matrixism: an Entheogenic Religion

There is an article on a entheogenic new religious movement called Matrixism being created at User:Xoloz/Matrixism. There are numerous sources for this article yet it has because contentious because it deals with the subject of entheogens. Thought you might like to look at it and perhaps contribute. 206.124.144.3 05:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week

WikiProject Pharmacology is currently organizing a new Collaboration of the Week program, designed to bring drug and medication related articles up to featured status. We're currently soliciting nominations and/or voting on nominations for the first WP:RxCOTW, to begin on September 5, 2007. Please stop by the Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week page to participate! Thanks! Dr. Cash 17:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week

Aspirin has been selected as this week's Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week! Please help us bring this article up to featured standards during the week. The goal is to nominate this at WP:FAC on September 10, 2007.

Also, please visitWP:RxCOTW to support other articles for the next COTW. Articles that have been nominated thus far include Doxorubicin, Paracetamol (in the lead with 4 support votes so far), Muscle relaxant, Ethanol, and Bufotenin.

In other news:

Bupropion has been promoted to featured status on August 31, 2007.

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology main page has been updated and overhauled, to make it easier to find things, as well as to highlight other goals and announcements for the project.

Garrondo is asking for individuals to help review Therapies for multiple sclerosis, as he is considering nominating this article for GA status.

Fvasconcellos notes that discussion is ongoing regarding the current wording of MEDMOS on including dosage information in drug articles. All input is welcome.

Dr. Cash 00:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Pharmacology Update

Here's a brief update in some of the recent developments of WikiProject Pharmacology!

Aspirin has just completed its two week run as the first Collaboration of the Week! Many thanks to those editors that contributed; the article got a lot of good work accomplished, and in particular, much work was done in fixing up the history section. It's still not quite "done" yet (is a wikipedia article really ever done?), but after two weeks I think it's more important to push onwards with the development of the new collaboration of the week program. I will be fixing up Aspirin in the next few days and possibly nominating it for either GA or FA status.

Muscle relaxant has been selected as the new Collaboration of the week until October 2, 2007! This article is currently rated as a "stub", so it's got quite a bit of work cut out for collaborators! Admittedly, featured status could be a long way off,... but still attainable! At the least, maybe we could at least get it up to meeting the Good article criteria? Please stop by the article and help improve it.

Resveratrol, having recently achieved GA status on August 16, 2007, is now making a run for featured status. This is quite a fascinating compound. If you can, please stop by its discussion page and leave comments in support of it.

Please remember that Wikipedia is not a forum for discussing or dispensing medical advice amongst users. Specifically, talk pages of articles should only be used to discuss improving the actual article in question. To help alleviate this situation, the template {{talkheader}} may be added to the top of talk pages, reminding users of the purpose of such pages. Additionally, unsigned comments and comments by anonymous users that are inappropriate may be removed from talk pages without being considered vandalism.

There was an interesting article on ZDNet last week about Hewlett Packard licensing its patented microneedle technology used in common inkjet printers to be used in transdermal patches to deliver a time-controlled release of drugs to patients. This information could be added to articles such as route of administration or drug delivery.

You are receiving this message because you are listed as one of the participants of WikiProject Pharmacology.

Dr. Cash 04:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 22:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Phenethylamines.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Phenethylamines.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. JaGa^talk 01:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cathine.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cathine.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 17:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: Image:Tryptamine.png

Image:Tryptamine.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Tryptamine structure.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Tryptamine structure.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reflection Polarization.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Reflection Polarization.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Files listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 July 17 if you are interested in preserving them. Thank you.

File:Reflection Polarization.svg

I removed File:Reflection Polarization.svg from the polarization article. The image is flawed: on the computer I am using right now, the labels near the tips of the arrows have the text too large; the labels are illegible because the text extends off the edge of the picture, and the letters overlap one another. I switched back to the raster version of the image for now.--Srleffler (talk) 16:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Reflection Polarization.png

Thanks for uploading File:Reflection Polarization.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 03:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you created the image yourself, just go to the image page and change the license tag from {{PD}} to {{pd-self}}. Delete the {{di...}} tag, and the image is safe.--Srleffler (talk) 05:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tryptamines.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tryptamines.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Betacarboline.png

Thank you for uploading File:Betacarboline.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Formula for Equation of Time

Hi, Russell. I just posted the below on the "Equation of Time" talk page, but thought you might not visit that page very often, and so am also posting it here:

I note that the formula used by http://www.minasi.com/dolog.htm shows that the longest day this year is December 23, which is 29.7761 seconds too long. I e-mailed them, asking what formula they used, but did not receive a response. Just for my own edification: (1) If the earth's orbit were currently perfectly circular, what would be the maximum change to the length of day caused by the current obliquity?; and (2) If the earth's axis were not tilted relative to the plane of its orbit, what would would be the maximum change to the length of day caused by the current elliptical orbit? Rodneysmall (talk) 16:12, 24 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodneysmall (talk • contribs)

Proposed Image Deletion

A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tyramine.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tyramine.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:06, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]