User talk:Vsmith/Archive29

verifiable content on "Copper Canyon" edit

Hi Vsmith, I made an edit to a incorrect opening statement. The current opening statement "six distinct rivers..." is misleading and if it is correct then the rivers could easily be named by the individual whose statement was accepted. I made a correction years ago but I think it was overwritten, and nobody challenged it concerning geography. I recented was encouraged by several people to revisit the error. I have all the pertinent INEGI maps, but they are not readily available as a resource, except at Mexico state capitals. I would be glad to cite them. Please describe the standard format for a 1:50000 topo, for instance "San Juanito G13A12 1:50000 (C)1978". I also added a ==Geography== section. There should also be a Geology section which I will add with some verifiable sources once I revisit the site to see if my changes were accepted.

Chappedhide (talk) 01:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Government produced topographic maps are valid references. For the example you provided it seems that a bit more info would be needed (the government agency producing the map). I often use USGS topo maps as references, as an example see the Eaudevie, Missouri stub article in which I recently referenced two USGS topo maps. Basically provide the agency or company producing the map, the scale and date published and either a link if accessible online or other info. Vsmith (talk) 04:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Stop it

Can you stop reverting because metric on this article has to be primary no matter if the CanAm is American majority. Also that is not benefiting Canadians it’s confusing Canadians. Conversions to metric will not work on benefiting Canadians. Metric as primary is benefiting Canadians. Period. Now stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MetricSupporter89 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Speak to yourself mate - and address the concern re: WP:MOS on the article talk. Vsmith (talk) 19:40, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Current Mayor of Gilbert, Arizona

VSmith I made a draft page for the current Mayor of Gilbert, Arizona Jenn Daniels. Could you help me get it live on Wikipedia? Any help would be appreciated. NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 16:36, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

That is rather bare. You need more info and supporting references along with wikilinks to other articles. Vsmith (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I will work on it. I understood that the way to start a page is to go with something bare, get it approved, and then add to it. I will give it another go. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickWikiAccount1708 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

I have added to the page for Jenn Daniels. Does it include enough content now for it to move from draft to active? NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Content improvement, now you need to convert those external links into references an the Wikipedia link as a simple link. I see you have been provided with good advise and links on your talk page. Go and study those. Vsmith (talk) 21:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC) Thank you for reviewing the Jenn Daniels page and your candid guidance. I have updated it considerably since you looked at it. I hope that you find what I have included to be much more acceptable than what you saw. I appreciate your help and guidance. NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 23:16, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

WP:METRIC

I don’t think you’ve read WP:METRIC. It says that articles about other stuff than just America has to use si units and non si units approved for si use. That section shows that we benefit more by having metric first according to WP:METRIC. MetricSupporter89 (talk) 04:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Common Era

It would be useful to find a source for the material with the 2015 fact tag. I thought about reverting but didn't, partially because of that It seems probably accurate but if this is a sock they probably know about restoring unsourced material. I don't think the editor is going to be around long. Doug Weller talk 15:55, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

That first sentence does need a source ... but saw no reason for removing the rest ... Roll on :) Vsmith (talk) 16:06, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

pennsylvania bluestone

Please revert my info box or suggest and edit to it. Lets work together. I am not advertising a commercial product. Such talk does not and will not take place on flagstones.org.Stevenvieczorek (talk) 22:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

You are using Wikipedia to promote a specific product. That promotional image, minus the inline external link, might be acceptable on the Penn bluestone page - but not on the general flagstone page. Your edits indicate that you are mainly interested in promotion - which is not our purpose here. Also you might want to keep track of your reverts. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. If my edits are acceptable on the Pennsylvania Bluestone page I would be happy to leave it there. Would you please revert the bluestone page? Perhaps the flagstone edit I made was a little less relevant than it should be. I promise not to advertise. Thank you for your input.Stevenvieczorek (talk) 10:07, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

SV - To me, flagstone.org appears to be your WordPress blog. Regardless of how neutral the information posted there can be, blogs are not accepted by Wikipedia as reliable sources either for referencing or links in info boxes. David notMD (talk) 13:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

This morning I reverted an edit by SV at Flagstone and an edit by 2600:1700:3260:5420:5951:c161:eab7:ea57 at Pennsylvania Bluestone, both that had created an info box with Vieczorek Natural Stone identified as manufacturer. I also left a note on SV's Talk page that continuing to be promotional could lead to a block. David notMD (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Vsmith (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Stop deleting material you know nothing about and have no right to tamper with!

You had no right deleting included quartz varieties and Chatoyant gems. What's next? Are you going to delete the minerals that are gemstones next? Rockmineralgems (talk) 19:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The reliable source for chatoyant gems is Walter Schumer which is in references every single cat eye variety has been varified in fact I have a cars eye collection that includes each and every mineral variety under Chatoyant gems. Grandidierite cats eye gems were just recently discovered and for sale under six months ago. I purchased the Grandidierite cats eye from a seller in Madagascar last month. It had a lab certificate that it was indeed Grandidierite. On observation it does indeed display a cat eye effect. Rockmineralgems (talk) 19:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Seems the "right" exists - and I be keepin on "tamperin". Thanks for providing the ref above. And your "lab certificate" is quite irrelevant. "the minerals that are gemstones" ... well as the list has no specific reference for each item ... nah (not yet). So please calm your tailfeathers down just a mite. ... and you are welcome. Vsmith (talk) 20:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm working on adding more reliable sources for each of the cat eye gemstones in the list. Many varieties of cat eye gems can be found online for sale such as on eBay and Etsy as well as DJ fine gems and others. I'm contacting GIA and USM to see if they can be a reliable for this... Rockmineralgems (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Seems ebay, Etsy and sale pages are not valid as references here. If GIA or USM have published info that would be good. Vsmith (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	This is for continuing to help clean up the Austin, Texas article and fix mistakes in it. TheCaliBook (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Vsmith (talk) 01:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Need for a sockpuppet invetigation on Bluestone

Bluestone is a relatively obscure topic. Given the deletion attacks, should I submit a SPI? David notMD (talk) 15:01, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Nevermind. I see you already blocked "Silence of the Socks."David notMD (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, that one was too obvious. :) Vsmith (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

I see that Stevenvieczorek has also been blocked. David notMD (talk) 19:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Richard Dawkins personal life edit

Hi, I added a section to the talk:Dawkins page on your reversion of my edit, didn’t realise I could message! Much obliged if you reply. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:2E2B:A700:70E0:9EC6:4071:F591 (talk) 00:05, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Replied there. Vsmith (talk) 00:17, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Infobox flags

Hey just a question about flags in infoboxs. I added a state and country flag to Columbia, Missouri after seeing some other flags added to city infoboxes, but you reverted it citing MOS:INFOBOXFLAG, which specifically list an exception for settlements. If this is no longer the case that should be changed. Grey Wanderer (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

hmm... well dang ... and you are correct. It seems I've been mistaken yet again, aw well I've undone that. Vsmith (talk) 02:56, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Yonaguni

Thanks. If you agree with me about the photos the editor added, could you find time to reply to them on the talk page? Or even if you think they belong! Doug Weller talk 14:25, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Talk page maintenance

You recently reverted my maintenance changes to Talk:Allegheny River using your administrative rollback power. My changes were trivial, and I believe in accord with WP:TPO. Now, take a look at Talk:Monongahela River. One section has no heading, and another has 'UNTITLED' as the heading. These do not help anyone, especially on mobile, to follow the discussion. Ordinarily a section should have a useful heading. If this situation occurred in an article, any editor would promptly supply a useful heading. It's a good case for doing some maintenance on the talk pages. Sbalfour (talk) 15:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

As long as the posts are not either abusive or completely off topic - just leave them alone is my policy. Talk pages that get cluttered or simply too long should be archived. If a post has no topic/title it would be OK to give it a relevant title, but not required. Vsmith (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

River articles

I notice you taking an interest in river articles where I also edit. Good stuff, especially your USGS refs. A lot of times I don't have a clue where to verify things. I don't add a lot of text, but do a lot of reorg, especially in the lead. River articles in the wiki are very haphazard. A lot are filled up with indiscriminate lists of towns, tributaries, even townships and other things. An article shouldn't be mostly lists, unless it is a list article. I try to bring a sense of proportion to things. Rivers are often nationally or even internationally known landmarks. Saying a river passes thru Ionia, NY, a tiny hamlet of just a few dozen people unknown outside the local area of the county, doesn't help anyone find the Ohio (Allegheny) River. Saying a river passes thru Pittsburgh, now I can find it. [End of blurb].

Thank for your assistance. Sbalfour (talk) 18:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

You are welcome. And I agree - small communities are relevant for small local streams, but not for large rivers. Vsmith (talk) 20:00, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Iodine protection problem?

Article Iodine is Autoconfirmed protected. Extended confirmed user Plantsurfer is apparently unable to edit it, because I just had to use my Pending Changes Reviewer right to approve his edit. Extended confirmed implies Autoconfirmed; I'm an extended confirmed user, and I can edit the article. So what the heck? Sbalfour (talk) 21:23, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I was wondering about that myself. I'd be glad of an explanation. Plantsurfer 23:11, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Eh ... I have no clue ?? Maybe just a glitch ... Sorry 'bout that... Vsmith (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Administrator changes

Reaper Eternal • ThaddeusB

Bogdangiusca • Christopher Parham • Necrothesp • Schneelocke • Siroxo • Sarah

Mentifisto → Lofty abyss

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

Bureaucrat changes

DeltaQuad

Kingturtle

Technical news

• In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.

Miscellaneous

• Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
• As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

mazatzal mountains

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazatzal_Mountains

This page was excessively devoid of information about the mountains of the Mazatzal. The purpose of the images were to encourage someone from ASU or U of A to actually expand the pages, or at least provoke discussions. You would think the Casinos in the area would fund a professional writer to expand these pages.

Who would be a good contact at U of A to get these pages done right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matrixupgrade (talk • contribs) 21:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea about Univ. of Arizona contacts as my last contact/work there was back around 1975. We don't need a professional writer - just some volunteer with the time and inclination to improve the article. Furthermore, simply overloading a page with large images is no improvement. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 23:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Vaccination

I don't understand why you did delete the whole section I did add this morning on the page "vaccination". My adds concerned the different types of vaccines that are currently in use. To me, the section I did add was clearly lacking in the previous version of the wikipedia page because, for those who want to understand how it works, we need to distinguish the different kind of vaccines (in fact, all vaccines are not made the same way).

You used the argument "not documented". However, this is not true since I did refer to each wikipedia pages of each specific vaccine. On that each specific vaccines, they refer to all the scientific articles needed. Removing the section I did add is clearly an over-use of your power by deleting the section I added.

Moreover, your deletion is difficult to understand since the section I did add is based on the french section of the same topic that I did modify according to my knowledge of the field (I am a virologist, in permanent position in CNRS, France). That is to say that, by deleting this section, you are somehow stating that you (alone) know more or better than the french-speaking wikipedia community ? Well, if this is such a case, then you should tell it load !

I presume you know "vaccination" is a hot topic (involving unrational reactions from religious people, or people afraid of worldwide conspiracy) and that we need to publish all clear information that will help people to make their own choice based on scientific objective informations (as objective as possible, that is, showing repeatable results). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remy.froissart (talk • contribs) 13:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Your addition had no references. A link to another Wikipedia page is not a reference. Wikipedia requires that you support your additions of content with WP:reliable sources and it is as simple as that. Vsmith (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

well, I still don't understand your obstruction because, somehow, you ask contributors to do double work, that is put the references on two pages, one on the synthetic page (i.e. vaccination in our case) and one on the specific page (i.e. on each vaccine page, in our case). This is non-sense and provoke at least two consequences : (i) it contribute to burden the whole wikipedia because of not necesary duplications of informations within wikipedia and (ii) your behaviour discourage contributors. By the way, please, since you know better on what should be and not be in that page "vaccination", could you please add the information that are now laking on the different types of vaccines that are now used... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Remy.froissart (talk • contribs) 06:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Well after looking at the vaccination page, I see that portions of the content are unsourced there as well - so seems to be a more complex problem. And referring to an article with unsourced content as a reason for adding unsourced content elsewhere is rather a bit of nonsense. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 12:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

"You can't remove citations just because authors are creationists or Bible college graduates" says the IP

Sometimes I despair. I can't think of a better reason. This person is a pain and persistent. It's the middle of the night for me but my old dog, who is dying of renal failure, woke me up and I had to take her out and found this. Many thanks and goodnight. Doug Weller talk 02:50, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

You are welcome. Singing: "We get by with a little help from our friends" and "Old dogs, children, and watermelon wine" Vsmith (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Both great songs. Doug Weller talk 19:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Mid-ocean ridge; Seawater chemistry

Hello. If I am tracking the edits correctly I see that you undid my delete of the section. Is that correct? Can we dialog? BrucePL (talk) 21:32, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Dialog away ... I'm listening. Vsmith (talk) 21:39, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I suggest the section is a distraction from the main theme of the article about a major seafloor feature. It can be placed as a topic in the Impact section where a link would take a reader to ocean chemistry and Mg/Ca etc can be covered - I started this. In addition, the section content is not up to date. Mg/Ca ratio is one of many parts of the effects of SFS on ocean chemistry. More depth on the topic is appropriate elsewhere. What do you think? BrucePL (talk) 22:38, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't see it as a distraction and if it be outdated - then update it. Yes, more depth is appropriate elsewhere - so summarize and link to the elsewhere. But, don't just delete valid content. Vsmith (talk) 01:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Would you agree to adding a few sentences about seawater chem in the Impact section and moving the existing content on SW chem to Ocean chemistry? BrucePL (talk) 17:04, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Seems the Impact section is chiefly about the impact of the discovery. I have retitled the Seawater chemistry header to Impact on seawater chemistry and carbonate deposition to align better with the section content as it is not about seawater chem in general. Tweak as needed. Vsmith (talk) 18:15, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam¹ • Flyguy649 • Fram² • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe

¹Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

²Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Bureaucrat changes

28bytes • WJBscribe • Wizardman

Interface administrator changes

MSGJ • TheDJ

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD

Oversight changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD • GB fan

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.

• In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

• The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
• The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
• A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

• In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Block of 59.167.95.221

I just gave them their second warning for vandalism and while they have made several unconstructive edits to Geology of Australia, I'm not sure 3 months is nessecary. It's quite possible I'm in the wrong here as I don't know how long blocks are usually suppossed to last. Based on my previous observations, I usually see IPs blocked for much shorter amounts of time. Clovermoss (talk) 02:41, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Seems their second block was for one month and their edits were blatant vandalism continued after warnings. I have little patience for such so upped the time - they are welcome to appeal/request an unblock. Thanks for your concern. Vsmith (talk) 02:50, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

The last block was in Febuary 2018, for 1 month, from what I can see. From my understanding of IP addresses, the people who use them change, quite frequently. I doubt that this is the same person. Just my two cents though. Clovermoss (talk) 02:58, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation help

Hello, Vsmith. I am hoping your map and expertise might solve a problem I have. There are 2 streams called "Fannegusha Creek", both in Mississippi, and neither of which have a wiki article. The standard way to disambiguate the two is by order of tributary, but when I type in the coords on Google Maps, the river names are not labeled.

Here are the coords:

• 32.5604168 -89.8709132
• 33.1495704 -90.2970310

I will gladly go back and create a basic article if I only know what to name them.– Gilliam (talk) 02:11, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

The first (32.5604168 -89.8709132) is a tributary to the Pearl River within the Ross R Barnett Reservoir. The stream in in Rankin County and the confluence is on the Rankin-Madison Co line. Per the Sharon SE, MS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quad, 1988.

The second (33.1495704 -90.2970310) is a bit more confusing as it is shown as Old Fannegusha Creek on the Marcella, MS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quad, 1982 and the 2018 US Topo of the same area. It is a tributary to Tchula Lake about 4 miles WSW of Tchula, MS. (see: the USGS map view, and click on the blue USGS topo icon at top left). Have at it :) Vsmith (talk) 03:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Well dang ... seems the Old Fannegusha Creek is at (33.1490149 -90.2973088) and the second one above (33.1495704 -90.2970310) is southeast a bit (about 4 miles) and ends in the Blissdale Swamp a bit east of the Old Fannegusha and Tchula Lake. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 03:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

why hello again

Greetings VSmith! You haven't shown up in my watchlist for a lonnnnnn time. Glad to see you are still around NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Good mornin' to you! Still here tweakin' stuff here 'n there. Try to avoid the big kerfuffles. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 14:24, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Gyatso1

I'm not sure if you noticed he was a sock puppet of WorldCreaterFighter. Doug Weller talk 18:46, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, picked up on that sorta after the fact, thanks, Vsmith (talk) 01:51, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Daniel Boone

I was all set to make an edit and saw that the article was featured, so I'm reluctant. If this was something worth including then it would have made it into the article before it was featured. I'm looking for someone who might be watching for inappropriate edits. Because of the quote "Legend has it" I'm a little concerned. Boone was supposedly gone for 24 months and his wife, thinking he was dead, had a relationship with Boone's brother from which a daughter was born. Boone accepted the child as if it was his. I don't want to go looking for the sources (you can see there are two) but these details are here.

— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:27, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Just because it is featured doesn't mean it can't be edited. Your source looks good so go for it. Or else suggest such on the article talk page to see what others who are interested or have been involved think about it. Vsmith (talk) 22:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

The originals would be better but I don't have easy access to them. I'll do it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:18, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

I did a search to see if Robert Morgan had an article, and I apparently found the biography here but there's no way to know where in the book to look, if I even can. I've found Google Books sometimes limits people to a few free pages.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Try searching there for a specific relevant phrase. Vsmith (talk) 17:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

That actually worked, so now the book is a source.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Many thanks!

Thank you for defending my talk page from the inexplicable IP attacks putting Hillary Clinton templates on it. I seem to recall something similar happening a couple of years ago. Very strange. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

No problem, you must have upset one of *****'s "very fine people" :) Vsmith (talk) 12:36, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Apparently so! Deplorable behavior. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation help

Hi there, Vsmith. I need advice choosing a title for two identically-named creeks: "Pellaphalia Creek" in Mississippi (GNIS entries 675581, 675580). These two creeks are both located within the same county, are both tributaries to the Pearl River, and both appear to enter that river near the same point.– Gilliam (talk) 20:45, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

That may deserve a prize for confusion :) Seems the western one (675581) is in two counties - Madison and Leake whereas the eastern one (675580) is only in Leake county. So maybe: "Pellaphalia Creek (Madison and Leake counties)" for 675581 and "Pellaphalia Creek (Leake County)" for 675580. Maybe with a disambiguation note at the top of each pointing to the other? Vsmith (talk) 21:27, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Done with hatnotes. Thanks!– Gilliam (talk) 01:07, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

K* Mineral Edits

I'm just trying to add unrecorded detail found in a journal. As I'm new to the wikipedia and I have no idea how to add unrecorded information. Anyway, Thank You for the edit. I'll add again if online resources are found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucypher n30 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I've deleted the article since I found precisely zero information that supported its existence: the sources they cited either did not exist, or did not mention K* (or, to be fair, were offline -- but Google dose not recognize that term anywhere other than WP and mirrors). You're a geologist, I figure you might have access to more offline sources than me and as such do a better job of finding if there's the slightest hint of truth in that content. DS (talk) 15:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Haven't seen anything in a reliable source. It appears an editor is attempting to promote or make legit some research in Russia. As far as I have seen, it has not received attention or legitimacy as a new mineral. Time will tell. Vsmith (talk) 22:23, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

I accept that a reliable source isn't available. Surely time will tell. Anyway, Thank you for your support.

The reason I added this because google doesn't have data about this mineral. I'm talking about a mineral my mentor got and I've seen. He doesn't like to add the image of the stone because of it's that rare but he agreed to get closer shots of inclusions and inside. (which was true and added to the Wikipedia) that's why I created the whole CGI in the first place. A few years ago Russian buyers went to Sri Lanka and bought pink spinels with rutile but actually there was no rutile but strontium, my mentor got his hands on some that times and researched on that. I found these details on my mentor's handbook (which was he agreed to provide). I have no idea how to add that as a source.

(a) that's all I have to say about the actual source,

(b) I strongly don't admit that I made it up as I've just started to contribute to the Wikipedia. I'll try to find some more source. Just tried to add something useful. - LUC (talk)

Madison Boulder/Indian Rock

Added corrections and details about Madison Boulder under the Madison, New Hampshire page as they are more relevant there. I agree that the list for examples under Examples > Glacier-borne erratics is better to be concise and link to relevant pages/articles. Just know the changes I made update factual information and I cited as many sources as possible. This is my first Wiki contribution so I am still learning. Thanks. Disutopia2030 (talk) 14:53, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

And I see your edit has been reverted. Couple of points: we don't us another Wiki page as a reference and that inline external link you had is also not recommended. Likely the reverting editor considered the content a bit excessive - too much space comparing the two or too argumentative perhaps. Don't be discouraged, it is all part of the learning curve. Vsmith (talk) 16:12, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

My Edits on Joplin, Mo

I copied a few sentences or so from a source as there is no way to word the way things were said any different from what they had been in the source and according to the copyright article you sent doing so is perfectly okay according to my understanding of the article. if this is not the case perhaps rewording the article so it cannot be interpreted that way is in order. everything else that was "copied" was actually restructured and reworded making it a derivative work rather than a copied work. you even removed stuff which copied absolutely nothing what so ever and cited it as a copyright violation. not sure how I can violate copyright when I didn't copy anything on one of the paragraphs I typed. this is very infuriating. I spent a lot of time typing that stuff out. why not just remove the parts that were copied instead of removing every single thing I typed? I would have liked to be notified to redo the stuff I had typed rather than having all of it deleted. ProbByDTH (talk) 00:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Quite simply don't copy anything. You may be subject to a block if you ignore copyright policy. Copying "a few sentences or so from a source" is a violation for which you can be blocked. If you feel you must use the exact wording then add it as a direct quote. Proceed with caution. Vsmith (talk) 00:50, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Can you revert the changes that weren't copied? you removed an entire paragraph which copied nothing. ProbByDTH (talk) 20:03, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

You are free to repost any content that I may have removed in error - just be certain that you are not adding anything in violation of copyright. Vsmith (talk) 21:13, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I do not know what was typed. surely you have a way to see the stuff that you removed and have the ability to revert the change. it was the one that started with "in 2016" or something along those lines and was about Butterfly Sculptures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProbByDTH (talk • contribs) 19:24, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Go to Joplin, Missouri and click the history tab and you will be able to see all previous changes to the article. Simply open either of the two edits with you username and you will see the content you added. Or click the two circles either before or after your edit and the content changed will be shown. Explore and learn, but do not re-add any copyrighted material. Vsmith (talk) 20:08, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Your help at Anthropology

Hi there! Thanks for blocking that hardware IP and reverting their edits at Anthropology.

That individual appears to be using another IP to continue their vandalism: 107.242.125.11

Re:Patagonia, AZ

I should thank you for your work here and your kind words. I enjoy documenting the historical aspects of the towns and cities in Arizona. So, as I said before: Thank you once more my friend. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:36, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Redneck

Hello Vsmith, I am sending you this in regards to your edit and comment on the Redneck article.

There is actually a lot of literature on the subject. It took me about an hour to find these citations this morning, and from the looks of things, I could double this in another hour. I would be lying to you if I said that I had read all of these titles, but, I have read all of the abstracts, introductions, and scanned through the text. Redneck is a rather complex and nuanced word that can mean different things to different people, but I think it would be safe to say it is not always derogative, and a significant number of people (historically and currently) even take some pride in the status and heritage of its impactions. I don't want to be argumentative and mean no disrespect but, the introduction to the Wikipedia Redneck page contradicts its own text, is factually in error, and frankly somewhat offensive. To insist in the opening paragraph that the expression redneck is always derogative, and never positive or humors, is inconsistent with the text that follows (and with the truth and reality of life in the south). Please read the entire page carefully and thoughtfully. It identifies "redneck" both historically and currently in positive, self identifying terms throughout.

From the text of the Wikipedia article -

"A newspaper notice in Mississippi in August 1891 called on rednecks to rally at the polls"

"By 1910...chiefly poor white farmers—began to describe themselves proudly as "rednecks"

"American coal miner union members who wore red bandanas for solidarity"

"Edward Abbey and Dave Foreman also use "redneck" as a political call to mobilize poor rural white Southerners."

"One popular early Earth First! bumper sticker was "Rednecks for Wilderness"

"However, many Southerners have proudly embraced the term as a self-identifier."

"The self-described "anti-racist, pro-gun, pro-labor" group Redneck Revolt have used the term to signal its roots in the rural white working-class and celebration"

"At the same time, some white Southerners have reclaimed the word, using it with pride and defiance as a self-identifier"

Additional references

Mainstream Journalism

Goeff Nunberg (2016) A Resurgence Of 'Redneck' Pride, Marked By Race, Class And Trump. NPR News, September 6, 20162:25 PM E https://www.npr.org/2016/09/06/492183406/a-resurgence-of-redneck-pride-marked-by-race-class-and-trump

Stephen Smith, Wilma Lee Steele and Tina Russell (2018) We are proud to be 'rednecks'. It's time to reclaim that term. The Guardian. Sat 14 Apr 2018 03.00 EDT https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/apr/14/redneck-pride-west-virginia-protests-strikes

Popular Journalism

Stacy Kranitz (2016) What It Means to Be a 'Redneck' or a 'Hillbilly'. Vice Newsletter, Apr 28 2016, 7:00pm https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9bgen5/what-it-means-to-be-a-redneck-or-a-hillbilly-ang

Elizabeth Abrahamsen (2016) Do You Know the Real Meaning of the Word 'Redneck'? Wide Open Country, August 17, 2016. https://www.wideopencountry.com/bet-you-didnt-know-the-real-meaning-of-the-word-redneck/

Peer Reviewed Literature

Marshall, Kelli (2015) Rednecks: A Brief History. JSTOR Daily, April 7, 2015 https://daily.jstor.org/redneck-a-brief-history/

Hubbs, Nadine (2011). “Redneck woman” and the gendered poetics of class rebellion. Southern Cultures, University of North Carolina Press, 17(4): 44-70. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26217352?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

O'Connell, Anne (2010) An Exploration of Redneck Whiteness in Multicultural Canada. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 17( 4): 536–563. https://academic.oup.com/sp/article-abstract/17/4/536/1642088/

Shirley, Carla D. (2010) “You might be a redneck if…” Boundary Work among Rural, Southern Whites. Social Forces, 89 (1): 35–61. https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/89/1/35/2235475/

Jarosz, Lucy and Victoria Lawson (2002) “Sophisticated People Versus Rednecks”: Economic Restructuring and Class Difference in America’s West. Antipode, 34 (1): 8-27 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00224

Patrick Huber (1995) A Short History of "Redneck": The Fashioning of a Southern White Masculine Identity. Southern Cultures, University of North Carolina Press, 1 (2): 145-166. A Short History of "Redneck": The Fashioning of a Southern White Masculine Identity

Books

Jim Goad (1998) The Redneck Manifesto: How Hillbillies, Hicks, and White Trash Became America's Scapegoats. Simon & Schuster, New York, 272 pp. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=YF5U4IkcFS4C&oi=fnd&pg=PA15&dq=Jim+Goad+(1998)+The+Redneck+Manifesto:+How+Hillbillies,+Hicks,+and+White+Trash+Became+America%27s+Scapegoats.+Simon+%26+Schuster,+New+York,+272+pp.+&ots=us-J15KqVL&sig=UbJnoL1akSxLCqpnJkmYfGQMOnw#v=onepage&q&f=false

Carr, Duane (1996) A Question of Class: The Redneck Stereotype in Southern Fiction. Popular Press. 196 pp. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=cUd5lBv-xLcC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Redneck&ots=-HNqYjldYW&sig=GyvP0NPTbs7ZgVli8_4pCA1mSQ0#v=onepage&q=Redneck&f=false

Kirwan, Albert D. (1951) Revolt of the Rednecks: Mississippi Politics, 1876-1925. University Press of Kentucky, 328 pp. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=65ofBgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Redneck&ots=mhHnnwOiNq&sig=Xrvgd6Z8DQlgmp5fjHeIwgwz99c#v=onepage&q=Redneck&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilafa (talk • contribs) 20:33, 4 October 2019 (UTC) WiLaFa 20:38, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Er... you don't need to convince me here; you just need to support your edit in article space with references. And ... yeah, I know what "redneck" means - I was raised in the Ozarks. Vsmith (talk) 04:02, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. My edit at 20:20 on October 3, 2019 did have four references, and it was deleted at 20:41 on October 3, 2019. WiLaFa 04:42, 5 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilafa (talk • contribs)

Vandalism

Your edit summary is incorrect and unfortunate. Do you know what vandalism is? Alanscottwalker (talk) 18:08, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Eh .. Which edit summary are you referring to? Vsmith (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

OK - that one, did you see the other one? Cheers :) Vsmith (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

No reason for you to split the conversation. It is odd that you are now invoking need for care, when your edit and edit summary did not show it. When doing rapid repetitive editing try to take care. Alanscottwalker (talk) 18:51, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

... and, did you notice the vandal edit you restored? Vsmith (talk) 19:15, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Ip changing

Hey it’s the Kansas City metropolitan area guy. I’m trying to constructively edit pages but my ip address keeps changing and it seems like I’m Purposefully sockpuppeting. It will always come back as being spectrum internet for all my edits. I Was blocked for using multiple accounts 9 months ago, but it wasn’t bad faith except for vandalism in the beginning when I started Wikipedia; didn’t know about sock puppetry. Forgot passwords and log in info can’t get into accounts. Should I make a new account? Made one for wikimedia for photos, don’t want to be confusing people not trying to sock puppet with IP, it just keeps changing then when I disagree with someone I look like I’m somebody else.

? Not trying to be deceptive ? My IP keeps changing. Not trying to spam Kc metro , just included all the cities with a link to the metro area that were part of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:3E51:2B00:7D8F:E9C9:ABB3:AD84 (talk) 19:22, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

I would say - yes, make and consistently use a "new" account and explain your previous editing clearly on your new user page. Earn some "editing respect" with careful editing. Some of us old dudes view ip edits with suspicion ... just the result of dealing with ip vandalism over the years, sorry 'bout that. :) Vsmith (talk) 19:48, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks I made this account 👌 — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 03:31, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Hey it’s the Kc metro area guy with the Johnson county stuff. I’m just kinda paranoid that if I leave Wikipedia for a while it’s just going to get removed again. Everyone From Missouri really hates Johnson County, seriously tho can you make sure it At least stays up there if I leave? I feel like I have to continually watch it and guard it. I’ve just been trying to make these pages more fair, it is half the employment of the metro area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 21:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

I feel like it angers people just to get half the metro area up there

It took a lot of hard work to get it up there and I’m planning on quitting Wikipedia For a while , but I just feel like I’ll come back and it will be shoved in the corner again — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 21:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

It’s like anyone can write anything positive about Kcmo but it’s promotion and a sin to write about Johnson County — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 21:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Dude I’m Paranoid Af never mind — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 06:22, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

I’m taking a break from Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 06:23, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Enjoy your break :) Vsmith (talk) 12:59, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Book as source for water exchange info at Metal ions in aqueous solution

Hi, Vsmith! Re the mentioned book, is there some chance that you could browse its content at some (University) library around you to check the info re solvation shell water exchange and ion hydration? Thanks!--109.166.139.84 (talk) 00:58, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

The nearest University library is ~ a 90 minute drive - I live out in the boonies. Vsmith (talk) 01:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

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) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

EvergreenFir • ToBeFree

Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox

Deskana

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
• Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

Technical news

• Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Swamp Article

Hi There Vsmith, my name is Gabby and I have been working on the wikepedia article "Swamp" through one of my wetland ecology classes. I went in last night (Dec. 4) and was working on a lot of the different sections, I realize now that I was not logged into my account so it just shows additions made by a random user. I saw this morning that all the edits have been reverted because of some errors. Would you care to elaborate and tell me how i can fix this? Gasawyer17 (talk) 20:08, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

The new section you added, Values and Ecosystem Services, was very poorly written with incomplete sentences, missing punctuation, odd use of bold text and although you had references it was rather difficult to tell what was referenced and what wasn't due to poor organization. Vsmith (talk) 23:00, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Damon Runyon's short story "Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the hot Tom and Jerry This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true. No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well V. MarnetteD|Talk 20:43, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, thanks ... and that was an interesting read. Vsmith (talk) 23:09, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm glad you found it interesting V. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 01:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Odin

In persian and Azari(Turkish) Languages at least dated back to 500 B.C. (Achaemenid Kings Period Inscriptions) آتش ( Transliteration Âtash) means fire and اُرت (Transliteration Ort which may be shortened and written as ord and od) means Fire (Right Fire or heavenly Fire) Respectively.

From cognitive perspective, ancient iranians believed that heavenly fire is source of fire and was and is symbol of rightousness and cleanliness within zarathustrians

This maybe taken as a clue to the meaning of Odin, Woden, Wood and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.81.111.190 (talk) 18:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Well ... and your point is? Vsmith (talk) 18:08, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Images in US city article

I couldn't help but notice you and Moxy working collaboratively over an image at Austin, Texas. As both of you seem more than familiar with image placement on US city articles, I would very much appreciate your input on one of the three RfCs that have been started at Talk:Minneapolis. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:37, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mr. Vsmith just had one question as I read your biography and wanted to ask that were you a US.Marine or a teacher in the university of Arizona as your profile tells that, and by the way Wow! I am really stunned after looking at the number of editing you have done in Wikipedia. Actually I am kinda new to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Professor Tesla (talk • contribs) 15:01, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I was a Marine from 1964-67. Obtained a masters degree from the University of Arizona in 1975 and taught optical mineralogy lab as a teaching assistant while a student there. And ... yes, I've done a bit around here since starting editing back in 2004 - learned quite a bit along the way :) Vsmith (talk) 15:10, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

IP 46.208.152.103 in defiance of his/her block

This is getting pretty upsetting: At the Jackson Pollock talk page here: [1] and edit warring again at the Jackson Pollock article here: [2] and he was warned here: User talk:46.208.152.103 Please help...Modernist (talk) 01:55, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Gave the ip a short break. Vsmith (talk) 02:15, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Ramasethu bridge

Sir,it is wrong to call ramasethu bridge as Adam's bridge.the name Adam's bridge is given in 1804, but ramasethu is the name given in BCE.IT is good to reconsider your edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:33AD:293A:1:0:E3F4:F464 (talk) 12:42, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

This is the English language wiki and the article uses the English name. Take your concerns to the article talk, but note this has been discussed there before. Vsmith (talk) 12:47, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Shadow biosphere

Hello. I strongly apologise to bother you, but if you don’t mind, I’d like to ask you a favor. It seems that there are some misleading statements in the articles Shadow biosphere and Desert varnish. The citations from them:
Carol Cleland, a philosopher of science at the University of Colorado (Boulder), argues that desert varnish, whose status as living or nonliving has been debated since the time of Darwin, should be investigated as a potential candidate for a shadow biosphere;
It has been suggested that desert varnish should be investigated as a potential candidate for a "shadow biosphere".
I was almost certain it is a kind of misinterpretation or a very poor paraphrase, because the source materials clearly say that according to some scientists the Desert vanish could be a possible product (or effect/trace) of hypothetical microorganisms, but not them. For example:
1. And a promising example is provided by the desert varnish proposed as a target by Cleland and backed by David Toomey in Weird Life. "No laboratory microbiologist has been able to coax bacteria or algae to make desert varnish," he states. "It is also possible that the stuff is the end result of some very weird chemistry but no one has been able to reproduce that either." So yes, these sites could provide proof of the shadow biosphere's existence, he argues (Life on Earth… but not as we know it);
2. Cleland speculates that a microscopic form of life may have been producing desert varnish for eons, but scientists simply haven't figured out how to detect it (Is desert varnish a pathway to detecting 'alien' life?);
3. ‘But these organisms, if they exist, would leave traces in the environment,’ Cleland says. In 2007 in the journal Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, Cleland wrote about just such a trace: desert varnish (Earth’s aliens);
4. I called these hypothetical microbes a “shadow biosphere" because, like all organisms, they would leave traces (shadows) in their environments, extracting energy and material for metabolic purposes and releasing waste products back into their environments (Five questions for Carol Cleland).
Also, according to the sources Darwin wasn’t exactly wondering if it is living or nonliving, but rather biological or not - it’s not the exact same thing, the citation: Although some scientists have claimed they solved the mystery, Cleland said nobody has really proven what causes it since Darwin himself puzzled over those dark patches of varnish in the 1800s. "He himself was wondering if they were biological," Cleland said. "He might be the first person who wondered if they were biological."
I decided to contact Professor Cleland herself via e-mail, and she explained it a bit more precisely:
1. according to her response, the Shadow biosphere can be understood as composed of organisms and their effects on the environment (thus the Desert varnish can be indeed described as a potential Shadow biosphere, but only in the second meaning, I feel the current sentences are misleading, because the articles describe a Shadow biosphere as hypthetical living organisms);
2. Ms. Cleland wrote that it is not clear whether Darwin was wondering if the Desert varnish is a living thing or a by-product of a living thing, both theories are probable (thus I think more adequate would be using the term biological, or not to avoid any doubts).
Could you take a look on it, and corect these sentences, please? I cannot find anyone who’d be willing to do it. You’re a much more experienced user than me, and additionally I don’t speak English very fluently, so wouldn’t want to make any mistake. I’d be very grateful for your help. Thank you in advance. Kind regards, Jojnee (talk) 01:10, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

As you have done the investigating ... just jump right in and edit the article using the references you list. You could also add a note to the article talk page explaining your edits and your communication with Ms. Cleland. If your edits have problems due to your professed lack of fluency - others will fix it. Your use of English here seems adequate. Just go for it. Vsmith (talk) 02:58, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Spaniards

Please friend go the page Spaniards and changed the number about 48 million~ in 340 million the total diaspora spanish descent Hispania Dx (talk) 16:26, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

A question about cutting the gallery because of excess images

I noticed when you removed the image gallery in the Bronze article due to and excessive amount of images. I believe it was an excellent edit. I see a similar situation in the Kettle article and I would like to do the same as did you. Is there a Wikipedia image or article guideline that addresses the matter of excessive images or galleries. I do look forward to hearing from you.Hu Nhu (talk) 17:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Image use policy#Image galleries.--Vsmith (talk) 20:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.Hu Nhu (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

The Image use policy page was very helpful. The Kettle article is terribly cluttered with images; however, after viewing the suggested gallery in the Women's suffrage in New Zealand, I believe the Kettle article gallery may appropriate if favorably altered. I am not the one to do that, so I will leave matters alone. Thank you for your kind attention.Hu Nhu (talk) 15:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

To be clear

I am a former academic, a former logging editor, and a regular contributor to the encyclopedia. Moreover, rather than being anonymous, I am to any wishing to reach me, easily reached at any article that I am editing. Then, per policies dating back to the founding of WP by Wales-Sanger-Kovitz, I would note that non-logging editors have been welcome, with the caveat that they make constructive edits. Per WP policy, one expectation of constructuve edits is a thorough and accurate edit summary. Just as I accept correction from others, including my students and children, when I misspeak or otherwise make a mistake, I likewise encourage others to acknowledge missteps. My doing so should not, per AGF and rectitude with regard to the applicable policies (including policies regarding civility), be cast as "bitchin". Certainly not by one in a position of greater-than-average authority here. Finally, I will note again, as I often do, that the use of capitalization in in-text notes in the markup—by AGF and, arguably, a bit of common sense—can be reasonably undertood as a tool to make non-textual annotation in the markup more visible to follow-on editors. That is, it can and should be understood as a courtesy, and not anything more nefarious. One view. Feel free to delete again. 2601:246:C700:19D:1459:6DF6:5BE1:3CA6 (talk) 06:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Postscripts. I am a fellow scientist, you have a great back yard, and thank you for both your service to students and to the U.S. 2601:246:C700:19D:1459:6DF6:5BE1:3CA6 (talk) 06:57, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

OK. To be blunt: due to the abundant vandalism problem around here by ip users, I am suspicious of any ip edit. You would likely find editing as an established editor with a known username a bit less problematic. Just the way it is ... Sorry 'bout that. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 14:58, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say. There is nothing about my edits that look like vandalism, if one takes the time to do the diffs. Thus, the policy is sound—unlogged editing is fine, if it is in keeping with the policies and guidlelines of WP. Vis-a-vis the Stainless Steel article, you have to admit, that it is logged editing that has largely created the mess that we are now dealing with. (Logged editors have contributed large blocks of the unsourced content that violates WP:VERIFY.)

That said, please, with regard to our common editing—The stainless article clearly continues to violate WP:VERIFY and WP:OR, and it will until we reach the point that every purported factual statement has an attached inline citation that makes clear from whence the content was drawn.

I state this here, not because you are placing unsourced content, but because there is a temptation to "prettify" the article, before the issues are resolved. So, I would ask—if an extreme tag is no longer applicable (e.g., if "unreferenced" is no longer true, because someone has added one citation to a section), please, do not simply delete the tag. Please, instead, place the next lower tag. Adding one source largely allows the problem to continue, and so a "one source", "refimprove", or other warning is still important to alert readers that the text is not reliable per WP guidelines and policies. Please, help me keep the readers informed as this article slowly moves toward being a decent article. (Right now, I would let students read about two paragraphs of it, no more.) Cheers. 2601:246:C700:19D:F10F:4254:C726:8794 (talk) 00:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Help With Weather Boxes

Hello, I was wondering if you could help me with Weather Boxes? Specifically citing. Wikipedia doesn't seem to want to accept my script for citing. Thanks, Old Hoar's FrostOld Hoar's Frost (talk) 15:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Don't do much with those and I don't see where you have been using them in your edit history - so I guess I'm not much help there. Vsmith (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure if these are good sources

I was trying to find a good source that the kiem is similar to the jian but to no avail, the only sources I have ever found was these sources:

• http://danviet.vn/dong-tay-kim-co/kiem-viet-nam-co-gi-dac-biet-so-voi-kiem-nhat-ban-va-trung-quoc-941064.html
• http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=183
• https://www.mandarinmansion.com/article/antique-vietnamese-arms

SpinnerLaserz (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Err ... why are you asking me? Yeah I spent 22 months in Nam with the USMC back in '65-'67 ... but have no knowledge about this. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 20:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Never mind. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 20:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

North Cascades and Paleo-americans

FWIW: I think the IP edit version was better than the one you reverted to here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=North_Cascades_National_Park&curid=45013&diff=947697967&oldid=944936485&diffmode=source —¿philoserf? (talk) 00:02, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Maybe so ... but Paleoamerican and Paleo-Americans both just redirect to Paleo-Indians. Vsmith (talk) 02:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Vsmith, Indeed but what was offered by our anonymous editor was simpler and carried the full meaning. —¿philoserf? (talk) 03:05, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Adams bridge

Ram setu (added by anon 2409:4060:21d:6bf8:2d45:3e98:7d86:a671)

Well I be. You're welcome. Vsmith (talk) 20:24, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there... who now lives on McKissick Island? I’m a tv reporter in KC Please write me back with their contact info if you have it?

Ashope@hearst.com

Sorry, don't have such info. Just came accross that article and added a map. Vsmith (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

"Mica (disambiguation)/version 2" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mica (disambiguation)/version 2. Since you had some involvement with the Mica (disambiguation)/version 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 01:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Gateway Arch National Park

Hello, I found your profile from checking the list of edits on the above's Wikipedia page. You appear to be a good user to ask this kind of question. I think I have found some information regarding Gateway Arch National Park that is not on Wikipedia anywhere. I would just make the edits myself, but I am new to Wikipedia editing and don't really know how to source properly.

Gateway Arch National Park (GANP from now on) actually consists of two non-contiguous boundaries in St. Louis, Missouri and East St. Louis, Illinois. Both the wikipedia page for GANP and List of national parks of the United States do not mention the park's Illinois territory. I figured that since Yellowstone's MT and ID territories are included, GANP's Illinois territory should be too.

Here are my sources. https://www.nps.gov/state/mo/index.htm . Click on that link, and zoom into GANP. My second source is an email from the deputy superintendent of GANP. https://i.imgur.com/xieLSke.png.

I guess my questions are:

1. Is my finding correct? Does Illinois need to be added as one of the states that is part of the park?

2. Are those sources sufficient?

Thank you for your time. WhiteWaterBottle (talk) 17:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

hmm ... the letter says the NPS doesn't own any property and "has no presence". Also the NPS website has no mention of the Illinois property (unless I've missed something). If you can find a WP:reliable source that discusses the Illinois property then we can add something. Vsmith (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. So here is a link to the section of the map I am referring to: https://i.imgur.com/KZXr5m5.png . You can see the two green boxes on either side of the Mississippi river that signify the park's territory. Does that change anything? Thank you. WhiteWaterBottle (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

What is needed would be that map, the one the imgur image was from, as it appears to be from an existing National Park Service map. That image - or the map including - it would be a reliable source and would be a useful addition to the article. Vsmith (talk) 23:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

The park on the Illinois side is the Malcolm W. Martin Memorial Park, which is owned by the Metro East Park and Recreation District, not part of the National Park, although it looks like there were originally plans to have part of the park on the Illinois side, they were never carried out. Mikenorton (talk) 10:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, "mystery" solved :) Vsmith (talk) 12:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both for your help. I appreciate it! WhiteWaterBottle (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Firewood changes

Who on earth burns wet wood? There are clear errors in the article which doesn't give Wikipedia a good reputation. And you don't need a ref for the obvious! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.151.115.80 (talk) 15:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but you do need references to support your edits - even things that are "obvious" to you. Vsmith (talk) 16:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Firewood

Since when do you need to provide a ref for saying that wet wood won't burn? This is obviously an error....and you have not even bothered to address the issue or reply to messages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.151.115.80 (talk) 17:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

"wet wood"? or green wood? Of course it will burn (both wet and green) - just wastes a bit of energy evaporating the water and pushing it up the chimney. I grew up in a log cabin which was heated by an open fireplace and most of the firewood we used was green. So, who says it won't? Vsmith (talk) 17:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry🙏 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samizami2308 (talk • contribs) 12:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Earth FAR

I just noticed that earth was submitted for featured article review, but that you were not notified. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:21, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

GEOLAND

I sympathize with part of your position about the Missouri place nominations, but I have to disagree that existing is enough to meet notability. Most of these places fail WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND as those guidelines are currently written, although I have found that some of them were just poorly written and are likely notable (such as Ballard, Missouri, Caplinger Mills, Missouri, and Iconium, Missouri). For some of the other ones, I'd say the only way they'd stay would be in GEOLAND had a rewrite, which would require a RFC. I hope there's no hard feelings over this; I'm a fellow rural Midwesterner. My sorting process is at User:Hog Farm/GNIS Cleanup/Missouri; it is a bit subjective. Pretty much, if I'm finding old sources that consistently refer to the site as a town, not a store or post office or country school, then I'm generally considering it notable. Hog Farm _Bacon 16:50, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

• Seems town is rather ill-defined. Also, if a community was important enough for the government to set up and staff a "post office" it should be considered notable. Especially if the immediate area contained several houses, churches cemeteries and schoolhouses. What are your thoughts about currently "active" country store communities that exist that may or may not serve or have served as post offices, but do have associated community buildings, (churches) and cemeteries. Such as Dogwood, Missouri, Goodhope, Missouri, Smallett, Missouri, Champion, Missouri, Gentryville, Missouri to list a few around here. Vsmith (talk) 18:07, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I have to admit this: I take a bit more subjective take on this than others, who might be more hardline than me. I'd probably !vote to keep Dogwood, I'm undecided on Goodhope, and Champion and Smallett would very likely be excluded under current guidelines. I don't feel qualified to offer an opinion on Gentryville; there's a lot of search engine noise for Gentryville, Gentry County, Missouri (I'd consider the Gentry County Gentryville notable). I've applied for newspapers.com access through WP:LIBRARY. If I'm accepted for that, it'll make it a lot easier for me to determine if something was a community or not. It's a bit hard to sort through some of these. A lot of these were mass-produced in minutes, with very little care taken to actually determine what something was. For instance, the Ballard community that I mentioned earlier is easily notable, IMO, but still has the two line stub. Compare to Rucker, Bates County, Missouri, which was literally just a railroad switch. It's hard, because there's not an easy bright-line test here, and so little care was taken in making this - the same user created hundreds of these in missouri, just ripping three sentences out of a database. Hog Farm _Bacon 19:50, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
    • That is a very disturbing answer. I have either improved or created those articles (as well as working to improve those hundreds of stubs created by that user you mention). If, as you say, these would likely be summarily deleted under those so-called guidelines - I may as well just quit and let your deletionist companions have a field day wiping out many hours of work trying to improve one line stubs. Sorry 'bout all that wasted time. Vsmith (talk) 00:00, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
      • The key word is as the guidelines are written. Have you ever considered an RFC on this? If you could get a consensus to change the guidelines, then that wouldn't be an issue with this. Hog Farm _Bacon 01:34, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Removal of Diffraction images

On 3 May 2020, it appears that you edited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripple_tank and deleted the images File:Obstacle-ripple-tank.jpg and File:Obstacle-high-frequency-ripple-tank.jpg from the Diffraction section. These images are referenced in the text of the section, which is now rather ridiculous without the images. I believe the images should be restored.

Unfortunately, the images are of rather poor quality. It would be best to replace them with higher quality images. Simulations might be better than an actual photograph.

This is my very first edit suggestion to Wikipedia. You advice on how to proceed would be appreciated.

Thank you, Wi11iams (talk) 15:56, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Seems there were several images that lacked clarifying captions. An uncaptioned image is worthless - especially in a technical article. Feel free to add good images to the article along with reasonable captions. Vsmith (talk) 18:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

I tried to enhance the messy looking Geography of Ladakh. Subsequently, you too made further iterative enhancements to my edits. I want to thank you for your time, contribution, effort and collaboration. Well done. My gratitude for you. Thanks once again. Happy editing. 58.182.176.169 (talk) 18:27, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

List of biologists (E)

Two days ago you deleted much of the text in the List of biologists at the initial E. I hesitate to call that vandalism, but it comes close. I would appreciate it if you would explain why you think that "*Christian Friedrich Ecklon (1795–1868), Danish botanical collector and apothecary" (for example) is more likely to encourage a reader to go and look at the linked article than "*Christian Friedrich Ecklon (1795–1868), Danish botanical collector and apothecary, known for research on plants of South Africa". I agree, of course, that a list shouldn't contain a lot of biographical details, but it should contain enough for a reader to see why the person is in the list. For the moment I haven't undone your edit, but I'd still like to see some justification for it. A few minutes later you changed "*Sir Charles Scott Sherrington (1857–1922), British physiologist and neuroscientist, winner of the 1932 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his research on neurons" to "*Charles Scott Sherrington (1857–1922), British physiologist and neuroscientist". That wasn't my entry (I would not have included the "Sir" if I'd written it, but I don't usually bother to delete such titles that others have put), but I think you've gone too far in deleting the rest. Do you not think that a Nobel Prize is worth mentioning?Athel cb (talk) 11:05, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm glad you "hesitated" as vandalism is serious stuff and such an accusation would need evidence. What I was doing was simply removing unneeded detail to keep the list just that: a list. The list links to the article for the details. I suppose we could change that and have each entry a paragraph or three ... maybe make each entry limited to 1000 characters or 1000 words ... eh? Take a hike with your vandalism accusations, hesitated or not ... or maybe look it up: vandalism. Vsmith (talk) 14:21, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

First, I apologize for using that word, which was written in haste when I was feeling attacked by your changes. Anyway, I'm sorry. Some administrators (one, anyway) fling around accusations of vandalism like confetti and perhaps a bad experience I had in July desensitized me. On 6th July I learned to my horror that I was blocked for a week for "abuse of editing privileges". It took a moment to understand what my crime was: it was that in my own entries I had written date ranges like 1920–2008 with hyphens rather than en dashes: 1920-2008. I'm sure I'm not the only inexperienced editor (I only started on 12th June) to make that mistake: surely it could be drawn to my attention in a friendlier way than blocking me from editing. If it had been I would have corrected all the hyphens myself. When I tried to discuss this on the administrator's talk page I was told "it is quite disruptive to convert en masse hundreds of date ranges to use the wrong dash." When I said that I had not done that (in fact I had about 44 hyphens, not hundreds, all made one at a time in entries I had added or modified; in no case did I convert other contributors' en dashes), I was told "I'm not wasting my time discussing it further." I was so discouraged by that experience that I almost withdrew from editing altogether, and, in fact, didn't resume until late August. Returning to your edits, you don't say, for example, why you think your entry for Christian Friedrich Ecklon is more likely to whet a reader's appetite to learn more than the somewhat longer one that you changed. You don't say why you thought that the Nobel Prize of Charles Scott Sherrington should not be mentioned. It seems to me that I have just followed the guidelines at the top of the page (which I didn't write, though I added to it a bit.) Apparently for you "a few words" means about two, but for me it means more than that, but not so many that the entry runs onto a second line.Athel cb (talk) 10:58, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

"but not so many that the entry runs onto a second line." Seems that rather depends on your browser settings or what device (desktop, phone ...) you may be using, or perhaps you hadn't thought of that. Vsmith (talk) 13:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Remove "More citations needed" template on "List of elements facing shortage"

Dear Vsmith,

Some days ago, you helped me improve the page "List of elements facing shortages" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elements_facing_shortage). Since you are an admin, I wanted to ask you if you think the "More citations needed" template which stands on the top of that page since 2016 could be removed. A lot of citations were added to the article since then, that's why I'm asking. Best, Poujh. Poujh (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Done. Vsmith (talk) 03:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot ! Best regards, Poujh. Poujh (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

The position of the unr template in article

Please note that the Unr templates should be placed at the top of the article, not at the bottom, thanks.--Alcremie (talk) 13:25, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Please cite the policy supporting that. Vsmith (talk) 13:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Ted Cruz Cancun section

Hello,

Why did you take the Ted Cruz Cancun controversy I added off the cities' page? I did not write it as a joke I was being very serious. This controversy is very much part of the cities recent history..

Kind Regards,

Jack J Drew — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:F586:5801:8971:201C:B7CC:34F3 (talk) 21:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

It is simply trivial and irrelevant in the article on the city. It is relevant to the article on the politician. Simple as that. Vsmith (talk) 19:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fowler Creek, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cedar Creek.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:34, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Request To Re-Review My Link Submission For Turquoise Healing Properties.

I appreciate you took the time out to review my content for turquoise. However, I reckon there has been some misunderstanding in either conveying the intent or understanding it. I understand the value of encyclopedic content; hence my sole intent to publish this was to provide information about the healing and metaphysical properties of the turquoise gemstone.

I’d Request you to review it once again. I’m sharing the link here: https://www.rananjayexports.com/turquoise-collection/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turquoise — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petra1101 (talk • contribs) 05:32, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Took another look at the site and it is simply a commercial sales page. We don't provide advertising - simple as that. Vsmith (talk) 12:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hi Vsmith! I just happen to run across your user page and noticed that you recently hit 200,000 edits. I just want to offer my congratulations and my sincere thanks for being apart of this project. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Alaska : why you removed my edit?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Geography_of_Alaska&diff=next&oldid=1019468795

This was a needed clarification, the beginning of this article is US centric and talks about it as a place in the US and not as a geographic entity. What if someone reading this isn't from the US? What does it mean to them that it's not bordered by another US state? This means nothing for them. A clarification about how Alaska is the region in the northwesh of North America is really needed. 93.15.241.95 (talk) 19:14, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah and there's not even a good introduction on what Alaska is, which would've helped. See the introduction on the page about the "Geography of Yukon" : "Yukon is in the northwestern corner of Canada and is bordered by Alaska and the Northwest Territories." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.15.241.95 (talk) 19:18, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

OK, reworded a bit. Vsmith (talk) 21:14, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

thanks 😄 16:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Aegadian Islands: what was wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aegadian_Islands&oldid=prev&diff=1019964794

Namings in significant languages for the subject were all named (italian, sicilian, latin, greek) except arabic. The name of the islands in arabic was officially used during three centuries of the history of the island, more recent than the greek naming, and I guess it's totally fair to include it, especially that it interestingly an arabized version of the pre-islamic greek name. --المهندس التونسي (talk) 13:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Seemed rather excessive for almost half of the lead paragraph to be a list of various languages - perhaps more should be removed or the language list moved from the lead. Perhaps the various language bits should be in a separate section? Vsmith (talk) 14:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Trinitite

Hi. I undid one of your changes to the article, as it seemed as far as I could tell to be an accident. I did use the undo feature but I think we were both editing it around the same time; in any event, it doesn't have the undo tag so I'm guessing you didn't see it? (I understand undo pings registered editors.) Could you review me revert and let me know if I was correct, or if I'm mistaken and there was a reason I'm unaware of for the change? A trivial matter, perhaps, but I might learn something. ;) 92.24.246.11 (talk) 17:05, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Seems I was simply shifting the image into an empty area beside the TOC - also the image didn't seem to be particularly relevant to the "Formation" section. I've now shifted it to the right to avoid unnecessarily starting a section with a left image. Vsmith (talk) 02:43, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the corrections !

Thank you so much for your corrections on the page Goodsprings,_Nevada. You beat me to it !  : ) - 98.26.118.255 (talk) 03:26, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

It just popped up on my watchlist .. and I just "had" to fix it :) Vsmith (talk) 13:27, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

thanks for reverting my changes with a mistake

Thanks for reverting changes which contains two parts: first is the copy/paste mistake, and the second is (I believe) the contructive part. But it could be contraveral. In order to avoid WP:EW I not tried to implement the good part of my changes again. Could you please discuss with me in the wiki's page my change? SHaggY caT (talk) 02:57, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

You are welcome. The vaccine bit you were adding is rather irrelevant in the article. If there is such a vaccine, it would need its own Wiki page - rather than adding to the Sputnik article. Plus it would need some solid references in support. Vsmith (talk) 03:13, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Let's discuss it in the dedicated wiki page SHaggY caT (talk) 03:18, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Dear Vsmith, could you please check a page: [3]? SHaggY caT (talk) 17:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Contact

Hi, can you please contact me urgently on email. I want to contact with a wikipedia administrator but the emails are not showing in the toolbox Alimsadozai69 (talk) 04:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, don't do that. Vsmith (talk) 12:17, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Just how special is Neuburg Siliceous Earth?

Hello Vsmith, I have been working a bit on that article (mostly formatting and source work), and on the related draft:Hoffmann Mineral about the company selling this product.
At present I would like to consult an expert on mineralogy for some questions I have, as, plainly spoken, it's hard for me to understand let alone judge the relevance of some of that stuff. I found you listed on WP:Rocks, so here we are.

In the course of my source research it appeared to me that the company owners have been putting quite some effort into establishing relevance for their product and their view of it, not only regarding their presentation in Wikipedia articles. This has made me a bit suspicious and led me to question some of their basic assumptions:

• Is this resource / product of theirs that they call really all that unique and special?
  • Or are there (perhaps many) other resource deposits like it, just not in Germany?

There currently exists a German article Kieselerde, about "siliceous earth". But it explains that this is an outdated, badly defined moniker. (Which translates to me as "There is no industry norm defining it.") And beyond its use as a non-scientific, vulgar and trade name for diatomaceous earth in Germany, it only applies to Neuburger Kieselerde = Neuburg Siliceous Earth.

• Is there an industry (or perhaps a scientific) norm defining "siliceous earth" / "Kieselerde" / "Neuburg Siliceous Earth" ?
• Why is there currently no article for "siliceous earth" on the English Wikipedia?
  • What you think, should the current situation persist: An article about Neuburg Siliceous Earth and no article about siliceous earth in general? Or should there, for example, be an article about siliceous earth, with the Neuburg deposit getting its own section? --ΟΥΤΙΣ (talk) 01:07, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

The article on the material is Diatomaceous earth. The article in question appears to be simply a promotional bit and likely written by someone associated with the company. In its current form - it should be deleted. Vsmith (talk) 03:33, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick assessment, but I'd like to inquire a bit more, since I would like to give a thorough explanation of why this does not deserve articledom, should that be the result.

They claim that it is a different material altogether by virtue of it

• not originating in diatomeceuos (organic) material, but weathered (mineral) granite (Is this technically provable at all? Does it matter in any way?)
• having a significantly different composition than similar materials, in particular
  • a lower portion of SiO₂ and silicic acid (60-80%)
  • a 20-40% portion of kaolinite

How did you get to your judgement, if I may ask? Are any or all of their claims untrue? Do you think, if their claims about material composition were true that this would justify classifying this as a unique material? Is there an applicable scientific norm or definition that could be used to say: "No, look here: It's still only diatomaceous earth"? --ΟΥΤΙΣ (talk) 09:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

about my edits on Rapid Prototyping

Hi Vsmith,

I got a email from wkipedia about my edits on topic Rapid Prototyping have been removed. Could you please tell me more details why ? I check the article carefully, but did not find the problem.  Thank you. 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Youlin2021 (talk • contribs) 10:02, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

The problem with your edit was that you added a spam link to The Complete Guide to Sheet Metal Fabrication to the top of the reference section without any context. If you wish to add content to the article based on that reference - that would likely be acceptable. Or if you would like to add that link to a Further reading section after the references that would also be acceptable as that would appear to be a valid source. Vsmith (talk) 11:42, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Vsmith,

Thank you very much for your prompt response and for pointing out the issues with my edits. That is very kind of you. Thank you.

The spam links in The Complete Guide to Sheet Metal Fabrication have been removed by the author. Is it okay if I add that article back to the Rapid Prototyping reference? If the reference I add still have problem, please let me know, I will be very happy to improve it. Thank you.

As a Rapid Prototyping engineer, I find this author's articles to be very informative. I'm hoping that others will benefit from it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youlin2021 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 26 June 2021

I've moved your links down to an external links header - as the website was not used as a reference in the two articles. Vsmith (talk) 16:25, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Vsmith, Thank you very much for that. I learn a lot from your job.

Is it ok to put two different External Links from one author to the Wikipedia topic ?

Hi Vsmith,

One author already has an article link in the External Links section, and I discovered another informative article he wrote.

I'm just wondering if it's okay to add a new External Link from the same author to the topic?

I appreciate your kind response.

Topic : Rapid Prototyping Title: Choose the Suitable Prototyping Process Link: https://www.rpproto.com/design-tips-guides/choose-the-suitable-process-for-your-prototyping-project/ Youlin2021 (talk) 04:10, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Seems you did ... and I've removed it per the warning about external links on that page. Seems that has been a problem there before. I would suggest that you add a request on the article talk page and see what other editors think about it. Vsmith (talk) 11:43, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the page Randploh Isham Routh...

I am a descendant of Sir Randpolph Isham Routh KCB. I am editing the article using many facts from private sources to make it more interesting. I will shortly add portraits to make the page richer in content. Somebody took the image for example of that log cabin in Lake Etchemin and used it in the original article. I have that in my possession. It was used originally on the municipality of Lac Etchemin Wikipedia Page in Quebec Where Sir Randolph was the first resident and built the first house.

This is the section that was previous article unflagged I added the last sentence and now you have flagged it:

Routh was not idle during the next two year interval on half pay, he wrote Observations on the Commissariat Field Service and Home Defences (1845, and 2nd ed. London, 1852), a handbook for Commissariat officers. It was quoted as an authority by Alexander William Kinglake in his Invasion of the Crimea. His son, Commissary General Leonce Routh certainly used that handbook during his service at Sevastopol.

I know his son Commissary General Leonce Routh served at Sevastopol and used his Father's handbook for Commissary Officers, that's why I added that sentence to the biography. Previously the Handbook was only mentioned as result of Kinglake mentioning it was a good book used at Sevastopol. How do I source that fact of that last sentence?

Many of the added facts in the biography are held in family archives. Such as previously it was mentioned in the UK DoB that he was the 3rd son. Well I thought it would be more interesting to mention he was in fact the 7th child, 4 surviving child in his family. How do I know this? I just look at the family tree! How do I reference that?

Please help me remove those flags.

Thank you.

Your truly,

The 6th Great Grandson of Sir Randolph Isham Routh,

Alexander William Isham Routh — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Alexanderrouth on 11:47, 1 July 2021]]

It would appear that you have a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest in the subject. Because of that conflict, you should avoid editing that article (other than removing vandalism and such). I also have an ancestor with a Wikipedia article, and I avoid editing that article (other than reverting vandalism). Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 17:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Rama Giri ...

Rama Giri temple Knows for Ramagiri Valeeswarar Swamy Temple Request to Review Rama Giri temple Knows for Ramagiri Valeeswarar Swamy Temple — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amolkumar (talk • contribs) 12:35, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

I cannot find the origonal page and I'm very intetested in that. Sandra Oudshoorn

Vandalism

Thanks for reverting the INUL draft. JazzyCricket (talk) 13:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Mono Lake

I disagree with your recent modification to Mono Lake; the material you removed is interesting, historical, (mostly) well documented, and doesn't strike me as "promotional". I am inclined to revert your change, but since I don't like edit wars, I thought I'd check here as to whether you had any strong reason to remove it other than your (apparent) personal dislike of the material (e.g., Wikipedia guidelines that apply here). Thanks.Finney1234 (talk) 13:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

OK, I've restored those with references. Yes, it is trivia and I rather dislike it and consider it irrelevant. So it goes - seems the imbd site is geared to that - but others consider such movie trivia to be important. Roll on down the road ... Vsmith (talk) 16:17, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks...it's not critical, but it does add some context to Mono Lake for people who can't understand the heavy science (I've tweaked a few sciency things, which is why it's on my watchlist). I appreciate your reversion. Finney1234 (talk) 02:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Dolomite

Did you really mean to remove the entire section "Origin" that I just added? I thought it was quite adequately sourced. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 23:04, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

It appears there was an edit conflict glitch (?) Restored, sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 23:09, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

OK, now I see - the unsourced sentence "This is easily distinguished with X-ray crystallography." in the description section bothered me as it seemed to need amplification and/or referencing. Vsmith (talk) 23:18, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

It turns out to be mentioned in the source covered by the subsequent footnote. I'll think about how to clarify it. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 23:22, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

2020 US Population Center

The citation you restored references the path of the US centroid up to 2010, not the projection to 2020, and so should not be used to reference the 2020 estimate in Wright County. I am the originator of the 2020 estimate, calculated by the same method used in my successful estimate of the location of the 2010 centroid months ahead of the official announcement by the US Census Bureau. I can share my proof of work in a spreadsheet if you would like to see it. Please restore my original changes for the sake of accuracy. Thank you! Alex.zakrewsky (talk) 02:12, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but no - you did not provide a valid reference for your change. Your "reference" was "ref Alex Zakrewsky, Principal Planner, Middlesex County, NJ Office of Planning /ref without the spaces. You would need a valid website reference to that Office of Planning document. Without a valid accessible reference, the change cannot be implemented. Sorry 'bout that. Vsmith (talk) 10:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

OK, I did a bit of searching. Found this "Mr. Zakrewsky expects the US Census Bureau to confirm his conclusion in coming weeks with their official population center announcement." So, when the Census Bureau confirms it and announces the change - then we can include it with the Census Bureau announcement as a reference. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 10:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Klondyke, Minnesota, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minnesota State Highway 12.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

American politics discretionary sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:01, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Just... no

Please tell me what you were thinking with this response to 2600:6C65's comment? Are you aware that Wikipedia:No personal attacks is a policy? That IP was literally implying that Swag Lord is a member of the Ku Klux Klan (among other things). I very much agree with ScottishFinnishRadish's statement on the matter; it isn't appropriate for you to respond as you did there. Combine that with your disruptive removal of the lead section not too much earlier ago, and I am beginning to seriously question your judgement when it comes to this topic area.
I write to you only in the hopes that I am wrong, and that maybe you will understand these concerns. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 05:16, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout that - 'twas really just a quick response to the "you need a thick skin" comment. Perhaps should have made that more clear ... so it goes. Vsmith (talk) 12:00, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Volcanic sublimate

An article that you have been involved in editing—Volcanic sublimate—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:06, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi.

I d hope I am not bothering you. I wanted to thank you for at least trying to help with the Palmer report stuff. I have not made any headway with the editors and am deeply appreciative for your efforts. I wish more would help frankly.

I do not see how this labeling does not violate the Wikipedia neutrality rules. There was a similiar conversation on Fox News talk and talk is still going on with Palmer but I do not see that tiny group changing their minds although I am doing what I can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:845A:6386:7301:F77F (talk) 17:33, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

graitude

I wanted to say thank you. You are a relatively new user but you have been very active.

As a new writer, I hope to write and edite as hard as yo do. AlexJan24 (talk) 12:46, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

You are welcome ... don't know about that "relatively new" bit though :) Vsmith (talk) 13:34, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

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) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Isaacs Creek (Missouri), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Current River.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Clear Creek (Daviess County, Missouri), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grand River.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Cahokia

You recently reverted some edits by Becazimmer to the article on Cahokia. I would like to know why. Hoopes (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

We don't copy and paste content from sources even when referencing those sources. Vsmith (talk) 00:44, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A token of thanks Hi Vsmith! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Antarctica featured article review

I have nominated Antarctica for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:14, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Making a list of albums and tours small

Hi. I'm confused as to why you changed a set width of columns to small text at Olivia Newton-John and called it a "fix" when, per MOS:SMALL, only things that qualify as fine print should be set at such a size. An overview-like list of an artist's albums and tours is never made small on their BLPs and, in combination with pre-existing small text in those sections, went below the 85% minimum text size we should maintain, so I've removed it. There was just no reason to make a list that readers should see full size small. Ss112 08:59, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout that - wasn't aware of that MOS rule. I seldom edit in that area (celebrity pages), just happed to look at her page for a song/album title ... and thought it looked odd. Thanks for fixing my goof. Vsmith (talk) 13:10, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Titanium Featured article review

I have nominated Titanium for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:46, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Why did you change it . Just check Hridayam soundtrack web page and look bas kar ji it is written by bulleh shah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.110.18 (talk) 02:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Chicxulub crater Featured article review

User:Hemiauchenia has nominated Chicxulub crater for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:04, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

| class="col-break col-break-2" |

Interface administrator changes

Evad37 • Galobtter

Ragesoss

|}

Guideline and policy news

• The Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines have been published for consideration. Voting to ratify this guideline is planned to take place 7 March to 21 March. Comments can be made on the talk page.

Merger discussion of Geologic mapping of Georgia (U.S. state)

You previously discussed a WP:REDUNDANTFORK issue in Geologic mapping of Georgia (U.S. state). Please contribute to a related merger discussion at here if you care. —  AjaxSmack  03:20, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Featured article review speed of light

I have nominated Speed of light for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Femke (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Featured Article Save Award for Speed of light

There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Speed of light/archive2. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

ITER Good article Nomination Goal

I would like to start working on making ITER a good article.

Is there a way I could help further this? ScientistBuilder (talk) 19:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Good articles Vsmith (talk) 20:39, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I am going to nominate the article. ScientistBuilder (talk) 15:36, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Pink category from Rhodonite and Rhodochrosite

I was wondering, is there any reason why you removed the pink category from Rhodonite and Rhodochrosite without any explanation? These are pink minerals, so I think the category makes sense. ANDROS¹³³⁷_TALK 20:52, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Video=spam???

I saw that there are documents written by telegraph ... A documentary with a complete overview did not seem like spam to me.--Skymen (talk) 17:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

A you-tube video seems a bit lacking - as in no peer review, anything goes. In what respectable publication was it published?--Vsmith (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Articles for deletion discusson ongoing about Opglabbeek Formation, Belgium

Since you have previously edited Belgium stratigraphic units, your expertise and comments would be well appreciated in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opglabbeek Formation. Paul H. (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Bobdownsite for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bobdownsite is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bobdownsite until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Kent G. Budge (talk) 15:15, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Application for mentorship

I am looking for a mentor. I wanna go through a course under your tutelage for a period of time that you determine for a counter vandalism course and/or a course on proper page creation. After which I will be given rollback and new page reviewer privileges. I'm reaching out to you because I wanna do this the proper way. It will be a honor to learn. Cheers Amaekuma (talk) 07:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm only active at irregular times due to current health problems and don't feel up to such a commitment.--Vsmith (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Red Sea

Hi, how would you source the statement of the Red Sea being a faster travel canal between Europe and Asia? It's a known fact. --104.163.139.131 (talk) 03:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

If it is a "known fact", then there should be multiple sources stating or discussing such. It would be incumbent on an editor to find and use such a source.Vsmith (talk) 12:13, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Mill Creek (Little Piney Creek tributary) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mill Creek (Little Piney Creek tributary) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mill Creek (Little Piney Creek tributary) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 7 June 2022 (UTC)