User talk:ST11/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Talk:Nitrogen/GA1

Unfortunately, nitrogen failed GA because of citing issues and a lack of images. You may need to get a "one ref per para" rule on the page, similar to carbon. It's not a bad fail, though - most of the rest is fine - so feel free to renominate when you (or someone else) have addressed those issues. Lanthanum-138(talk) 09:16, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Period 4 element

I've upgraded it since the content was about similar to Period 3 element. Lanthanum-138(talk) 03:52, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

GAN of temnospondyli

Thanks for the review! Smokeybjb (talk) 18:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Silicon

Nice job! Like what I see, but still there are some points we have to address! I will help where I can!--Stone (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation about faster-than-light expansion in the early universe,

Thanks for the explanation about faster-than-light expansion in the early universe. I'm kicking myself for not seeing that. CarbonMike — Preceding unsignedcomment added by 2.102.85.113 (talk) 04:10, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Armlania

This was a perfect candidate for speedy deletion, under G3. Whether that's called vandalism or a hoax isn't really important; what matters is that such nonsense spends less time on our servers. Your AfD wasn't wrong, and I appreciate the time you spent on it, though. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:36, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

{{db-nonsense}}

Hi StringTheory11!

I reviewed a couple of pages you tagged for speedy deletion under criterion G1 - patent nonsense. In general, a page written in a foreign language does not qualify (except, of course, if the equivalent English counterpart would qualify). When encountering such a page, you can use Google Translate for a rough translation and take appropriate action based on that. If you are still unsure whether the content may be worth retaining, the page can be listed on WP:PNT. Proposed deletion is another alternative for pages that do not fit any speedy deletion criterion but is an uncontroversial deletion candidate. Regards,decltype (talk) 07:06, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Astatine

I just pitched into astatine, which you passed for GA recently, at peer review. Some of the prose was surprisingly weak for a good article. You may want to take a look at my diffs to see some of the prose fixes I made. Choess (talk) 06:40, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice on GA nomination reviews (sorry if this sounds sarcastic, there is no sarcasm intended). I probably was a bit lenient on passing this on further inspection. Since it was the first article I reviewed that was controversial (the other, Temnospondyli, was without a doubt a GA), I was probably too lenient with the criteria in this case. I will remember this for next time I review an article. Thanks for the input!StringTheory11 (talk) 06:57, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem, just wanted to let you know. I find that in doing GA reviews I often have to make two different "passes": a high-level read, to get a feel for the overall organization of the article, any content deficiencies, etc., and then a low-level pass where I try to read each sentence in isolation and feel for prose issues. It's easy to miss those when I'm just reading at normal speed. Thanks for your help at GAC. Choess (talk) 18:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ST11. You have new messages at WP:CHUS.
Message added 21:44, 26 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 21:44, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

Hi StringTheory11. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Periodic table, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Subshell(check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 13:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle

Is there are a reason why you tag it as a hoax? Jim101 (talk) 03:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion, the references were so incomplete that it was impossible to figure out what they were actually referencing. That, and that such a large article should be created at once makes me believe that it is a hoax. However, it may, of course, not be hoax that I simply mistook for one. Thank You.StringTheory¹¹ 03:28, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Probably should clarify myself. The reason that I believe that large articles are likely hoaxes is that I have seen too many times where they have been, and had never once seen one before this that was not a hoax. Thank You.StringTheory¹¹ 03:30, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

One more question, which part of the reference is incomplete? Jim101 (talk) 03:43, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I was really confused when I saw the citations section and the references section separate. I had never seen that before on a wikipedia article and was slightly confused. StringTheory¹¹ 03:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Comedic journalism

Hi StringTheory11,

I am the creator of the page, Comedic journalism. You have nominated my page for a speedy deletion due to copyright infringement. I have submitted this article for a course I am taking in university and it is my first time submitting anything onto the Wikipedia mainspace. It would be helpful for me to know where in my article there is copyright infringment so that I can edit it, rather than just having my article deleted.

Thank you. --Leanna Guzzo (talk) 04:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for responding politely! Unfortunately, wikipedia is not a place for essays. I may have accidentallybitten you in tagging this article for a copyright infringement. If the article was not written by you, then it is a copyright infringement and wikipedia cannot have this in its project space. If, however, you did write the paper, then feel free to move it to the userspace (e.g. If I were to move the sandbox to the userspace, I would move it to something like User:StringTheory11/WP Sandbox; you would likely move this to something like User:Leanna Guzzo/Paper). The article can't be in the namespace because it is paper, and wikipedia is only for encyclopedic articles. As long as you wrote the article yourself, it is fine and feel free to move it to the userspace, but if the article has been written by anyone else, including the professor that is teaching the course, we cannot have it on wikipedia and it has to be deleted immediately. If you have any further questions, a great place to go would be the help desk. There, some of the most experienced wikipedians will help you figure out what would be best. StringTheory¹¹ 05:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

StringTheory11, I just declined your speedy deletion request on this article. What makes you think it's a copyright violation? I ran some searches on various phrases in the article, and I don't see anything similar. What do you think this is copied from? Note that I'm not saying that the article shouldn't be deleted (I haven't reviewed it that far), but just that I see no rationale for deleting under G12. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I probably acted too impetuously here. I was in a really bad mood at the time, but it's no excuse. StringTheory¹¹ 07:01, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: 2012 in France

Hello StringTheory11, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of 2012 in France, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern:Contains sufficient content to be a stub. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 12:03, 26 December 2011 (UTC)