User talk:Mu301/Archive

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mu301. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives

Archive index  Bookmarked  2005 — 2008  2009 — 2010  2011 — 2012  2013 — 2014  2015 — 2017  2018 — 2019  2020 — 2021  2022 — Full archive (single page)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello Mu301. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Biblio (talk) 17:59, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I've noticed that a couple of times when you've edited Cosmos 1, the "degrees" symbol in "78°" gets converted to a three-byte sequence as in "78�" wherever it appears.

The latter appears to be the UTF-8 encoding for U+FFFD REPLACEMENT CHARACTER. I believe the English Wikipedia is defined to be encoded in ISO-8859-1 (see m:Help:Special characters) - that's certainly what my Firefox reports it as - so use of UTF-8 isn't appropriate, and in any case U+FFFD isn't equivalent to a degree symbol. It may be that your browser (or something) is expecting the form data to be in UTF-8, in which "78°" is not a valid sequence; this would explain why it thinks U+FFFD is a sensible replacement.

A workaround is obviously to use °, and I'll probably do that, but (assuming you're not making these changes deliberately) you may want to find and fix whatever's corrupting your edits.

Cheers -- JTN 20:25, 2005 May 7 (UTC)

Thank you for postulating discovery year to every extrasolar planets for me in list of extrasolar planets article. I replaced with discovery year in the last column and leaved the blanks of discovery year of planets so I thinked that somebody will postulate all discovery years for me before the start. Cosmium 21:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for help in the missing topics page - Skysmith 12:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, all found and fixed now. Rich Farmbrough, 21:34 20 February 2007 (GMT).

looks like I spoke to soon. Thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 21:54 20 February 2007 (GMT).

That should really be it (unless I get reverted of course!) Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough, 22:06 20 February 2007 (GMT).

Replied. Thank you for reminding me of providing a reason for the proposal, I didn't read the merge page thoroughly enough. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 02:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi - I've just noticed your post with the links to references about the merger; sadly, I get a message saying I am not on campus at (presumably) your university; can you post the actual references so the rest of us can have a look? Thanks Chrislintott 22:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Black hole was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

You don't have a reference for the Milky Way absolute magnitude, do you? It would be great to include one. Chrislintott 13:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: edits to Image:X-peek.gif. Permission wasn't and isn't needed from you because it's being used under fair use. Also, even if you took it originally, that doesn't enable you to license it under the GFDL: it's a screenshot of software to which the copyright is still owned by Symbolics (or whatever the corporation that inherited the rights is named), and they sell their stuff under a proprietary license last I heard. I certainly appreciate the extra source information, but your copyright assertions are wrong. --Gwern (contribs) 17:01 21 April 2007 (GMT)

We could do an article on running Adventure on a PDP-10. Sun-collector 13:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

The SEDS.org website is not a reliable reference. Much of their information is out-of-date or inaccurate. Some of their pages do not even contain references. Please do not use their web page as a reference on Wikipedia. (I will find a better reference on planetary nebulae for nebula.) Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 20:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The ESO website looks better. Go ahead and use that as a reference. However, I will try finding a book that makes the statement. Dr. Submillimeter 21:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I copied the text from another article, but since the reference was used multiple times, it used a ref name and I just didn't think to check for those. I'll add it in. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Nice toys. Thanks for the pointer. Sun-collector 17:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, no. I'm more or less based in Missouri. But I'd be more than willing to do anything useful, short of buying a plane ticket to attend the meeting, to offer any help you might think I could. John Carter (talk) 14:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I may be in town the weekends of either October 18-19, or October 25-26, so I might be able to show up then. Otherwise, I may not make it. I suggest sometime around 7:00 on a weekend. Otherwise, I would probably not be able to make it, as I am about an hour away. RedThunder 21:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

October 18th and 25th are good for me, but since i'm also an hour away, make it probably 3:30 or 4. Sam ^Blab 12:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mu301. Good to see you're making progress with the Providence meetups. Did you try to contact the Free Culture folks? How about the users in Category:Wikipedians in Rhode Island?--Pharos (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I, Geoffrey Plourde, declare that I am the holder of the Username "Geoff Plourde" on this project. I certify that I made an application on the English Wikiversity to rename "Geo.plrd" to "Geoff Plourde" to allow for usage of SUL.

Sincerely;

Geoff Plourde (talk) 02:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me about the Providence meet-ups (Nov. 8, Dec. 13) but I don't think I'll be able to make it. Something closer to Boston would be a better place for me to start dipping my toes into this pond. But I'm glad to know about them. — Martha (talk) 05:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Hope you had a good time at the Providence meet up, sorry I missed it. I was actually looking forward to going but totally spaced it. Oh well. --Tom 14:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Per my query at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Astronomy, you removed a paragraph on an astronomical alignment from 2012. I'm curious to know just what the factual situation regarding this supposed alignment actually is. Neither http://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=&lang=&q=Talk:2012/Archive_2#Rewrite_of_Maya_Long_Count_info nor Galactic Alignment, which you referenced, seems to spell this out clearly (or perhaps "clearly, in lay-person's terms" :-) ).
As far as I can tell, you've deleted the John Major Jenkins version of this from 2012 twice already. It seems to me that unless we have something in the article on the actual astronomy involved (text or a link to appropriate article), we can expect people to keep adding the Jenkins version back in. -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 21:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

You mentioned on this page that the article may be a candidate for wikiversity. Apparently mathematical conclusions are considered OR by wikipedia admins as the article has been deleted.

I'll request a copy of it be provided for me (I've several older ones, but not the latest) if it would be allowed at wikiversity (even as an example of how not to write an article). Not to familiar with wikiversity policies, etc. If you have any interest in getting it up as a page at wikiversity I'll be around. I'm going to appeal the deletion as I don't feel mathematical conclusions are OR (is the conclusion 5*5=25 OR if it hasn't been posted yet?).

Thanks for your time, Matt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew Benesi (talk • contribs) 21:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I will temporarily undelete 7d Physics so that it can be imported into Wikiversity when you are ready. Just post a note on my talk page and I will do it immediately (hopefully). --Aqwis (talk – contributions) 14:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Aqwis (talk – contributions) 22:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Your question, yes, I made a draft of the template! I even posted a couple different versions of it on the userpages of the editors in question. It's here: User:Katr67/Sandbox#School project boilerplate sandbox (starting with the "Welcome" header). Feel free to copy it and fix it up, as I might not get around to posting it back on the project page. You can see I started with {{welcome}} as a base for it. Thanks for your interest! Katr67 (talk) 21:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi.

In its deletion discussion, you !voted to merge Topic outline of Big Science with the article Big Science (which has also been nominated for deletion, by the way).

The Topic outline of Big Science is a member of a set of outlines that together make up Wikipedia's outline of knowledge, one of Wikipedia's contents subsystems. These outlines used to be called "Lists of basic topics".

Merging the page into an article will remove it from Wikipedia's outline of knowledge.

I'm in the process of fixing the Topic outline of Big Science, but in order to address your concerns, I need to know what your concerns are...

Why do you feel the page should be removed from Wikipedia's outline of knowledge, and what needs to be done to it in order for it to remain a part of it?

What do I need to do to fix it?

Would you mind returning to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Topic outline of Big Science and explaining your reasons? That would sure help.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist    01:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi! We invite you to the Hartford, Connecticut meetup, currently scheduled for January 24, as the previous meetup was lightly attended due to a snowstorm. You are being notified because your name is listed on Wikipedia:Meetup/Hartford/Invite list. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:45, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Nice catch there...thanks for fixing that redlink. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The next Connecticut Wikipedia meetup will take place sometime during April 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please list on the meetup page whether or not you can go. Also please contribute ideas for topics and dates! Hope to see you there!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Why did you change the launch date/time to a time that is different from the time on the official Kepler Mission page? Do you know something that's not on that page? Vegasprof (talk) 19:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The 2nd Connecticute Meetup will take place on April 18th, 2009 at Real Art Ways cafe and arts center in Hartford, Connecticut. Please state whether or not you can attend on the meetup page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) because your name was on the invite list. 16:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello. I created the article Papaloizou-Pringle instability because it seemed rather significant, but have no idea, beyond the scant understanding I have, what more can/should be done with it. Can you help? I found your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Astronomy. Many thanks! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Here. Are there any? Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 00:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I know you make edits in Providnece, so was wondering if you could join the discussion on the Crime Rate in Providence. We have reached a stale mate, and could use some more input. ThanksYou Can't Clap with One Hand (talk) 14:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey. Just to say I confirmed it was me that requested this name change. Thanks - Gerard^talk 00:47, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for signing up for the new pages incubation trial! The instructions are on the page itself - any questions or quibbles before you get started? Ironholds (talk) 19:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

	New England Wikimedia General Meeting
	The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future! Potential topics: What is a Wikimedia chapter and should we work towards one? Planning of regular Boston meetups (any other New England cities?) Planning for upcoming coordinated events (Wikipedia Love Libraries, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiknic, etc.) Outreach to universities (WikiProject Academical Village) and cultural institutions (GLAM) Wikimania DC is this summer. Your ideas!
	Sunday, April 22 1:30 PM – 4:30 PM	Conference Room C06, Johnson Building, Boston Public Library—Central Library 700 Boylston St., Boston MA 02116
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England!

---

Message delivered by Dominic at 08:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

U.S. Ada Lovelace Day 2012 edit-a-thon, Harvard University - You are invited!

Now in its fourth year, Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Participants from around New England are invited to gather together at Harvard Law School to edit and create Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend or sign up to participate remotely - visit this page to do either. 00:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

They were created by a university class as part of their final grade/project, some of us were thinking the articles could maybe have a home at Wikiversity, but I need some guidance here. Can they be moved to Wikiversity, are they good enough, etc. (I understand the articles are now starting to be PROD'ed on WP, probably as 'subjects failing notability'.) Please see discussion on User talk:Dennis Brown at Curious about some new articles. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 17:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 09:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Ada Lovelace Day Women-in-STEM Edit-a-thon - Providence, RI - You are invited!

Ada Lovelace Day is an international celebration of women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), and related fields. Please join us in editing Wikipedia entries on women who have made significant contributions to the STEM fields. Register to attend in person at Brown University (Providence, RI), or sign up to participate remotely. Please visit our event page for more information. Girona7 (talk) 23:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

NE Meetup #4: January 18 at MIT Building 5

Dear Fellow Wikimedian, You have been invited to the New England Wikimedians 2014 kick-off party and Wikipedia Day Celebration at Building Five on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus on Saturday, January 18th, from 3-5 PM. Afterwards, we will be holding an informal dinner at a local restaurant. If you are curious to join us, please do so, as we are always looking for people to come and give their opinion! Finally, be sure to RSVP here if you're interested. I hope to see you there! Kevin Rutherford (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March - You are invited!

New England Wikimedians is excited to announce a series of Wikipedia edit-a-thons that will be taking place at colleges and universities throughout Massachusetts as part of Wikiwomen's History Month from March 1 - March 31. We encourage you to join in an edit-a-thon near you, or to participate remotely if you are unable to attend in person (for the full list of articles, click here). Events are currently planned for the cities/towns of Boston, Northampton, South Hadley, and Cambridge. Further information on dates and locations can be found on our user group page. Questions? Contact Girona7 (talk)

NE Meetup #5: April 19th at Clover Food Lab in Kendall Square

Dear Fellow Wikimedian, New England Wikimedians would like to invite you to the April 2014 meeting, which will be a small-scale meetup of all interested Wikimedians from the New England area. We will socialize, review regional events from the beginning of the year, look ahead to regional events of 2014, and discuss other things of interest to the group. Be sure to RSVP here if you're interested. Also, if you haven't done so already, please consider signing up for our mailing list and connect with us on Facebook and Twitter. We hope to see you there! Kevin Rutherford (talk) and Maia Weinstock (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Adrianne Wadewitz edit-a-thons in Southern New England

As you may have already heard, the Wikipedia community lost an invaluable member of the community last month. Adrianne Wadewitz was a feminist scholar of 18th-Century British literature, and a prolific editor of the site. As part of a worldwide series of tributes, New England Wikimedians, in conjunction with local institutions of higher learning, have created three edit-a-thons that will be occurring in May and June. The events are as follows: May 21st at Northeastern University's Snell Library, in the Digital Scholarship Commons on the second floor May 22nd at Brown University's Rockefeller Library, in the Digital Scholarship Lab June 25th at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (exact location TBA), where we will also be hosting a "how to conduct an edit-a-thon" session beforehand We hope that you will be able to join us, whether you are an experienced editor or are using Wikipedia for the first time. If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!

After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested: Cape Cod Wiknic and Photography Blitz on June 14th in Barnstable County, with complete travel reimbursements available for those who participate Adrianne Wadewitz Memorial Edit-a-thon on June 25th at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (exact location TBA), where we will also be hosting a "how to conduct an edit-a-thon" session beforehand 3rd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, which will feature at least one guest speaker, and possibly many more Although we also aren't hosting this year's Wikimania, we would like to let you know that Wikimania this year will be occurring in London in August: Wikimania 2014 in London If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

Upcoming events hosted by New England Wikimedians!

After many months of doubt, nature has finally warmed up and summer is almost here! The New England Wikimedians user group have planned some upcoming events. This includes some unique and interesting events to those who are interested: Cape Cod Wiknic and Photography Blitz on June 14th in Barnstable County, with complete travel reimbursements available for those who participate Adrianne Wadewitz Memorial Edit-a-thon on June 25th at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (exact location TBA), where we will also be hosting a "how to conduct an edit-a-thon" session beforehand 3rd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, which will feature at least one guest speaker, and possibly many more Although we also aren't hosting this year's Wikimania, we would like to let you know that Wikimania this year will be occurring in London in August: Wikimania 2014 in London If you have any questions, please leave a message at Kevin Rutherford's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Induced seismicity page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can </noinclude>:REVISIONUSER}}&section=new report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. --mikeu ^talk 01:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

So can I add anything and put that tag ? Where's the policy for this tag please. 86.190.207.115 (talk) 22:07, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

If you find a section missing sources it is best to put {{Unreferenced section}} at the top of the section rather than blanking it out. This draws attention to improve the sourcing. It would be trivial to find reliable sources to confirm that the information in the tables that you removed is correct and a list of awards could hardly be considered "Contentious material about living persons..." that "should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion" as described at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. If the material in those sections is incorrect add a message to the talk page and ask questions about it. Is the information wildly exaggerated? If so it should be reported at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard --mikeu ^talk 22:23, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

But all the sections are unsourced ? 86.190.207.115 (talk) 22:40, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Here I've placed {{unsourced section|date=January 2016|section=list of tables below}} below the opening paragraphs but above the first section header with a message stating that all sections below need sources. Just one edit to cover everything.

Are you concerned that the information is untrue/exaggerated or that it is lacking in sources? A suspicion that the information is false or wildly overstated would warrant blanking the sections. If the lists of awards looks reasonable but are in need of sources it would be best to go to Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard and post the names of the articles and explaining the problem. I'm not familiar with the awards, but it looks like this could be easily fixed with just a handful of reliable footnotes. I checked a few of them and they look legit. --mikeu ^talk 23:06, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I also left a message on the talk page. --mikeu ^talk 23:09, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the tag but I still belive this is misleading information published on Wikipedia since there's no direct access for verifibility via a source/ref. Isn't that Wikipedia all about ? 86.190.207.115 (talk) 23:12, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The goal is to source the statements. But, if you see a statement without a source it would be best to check the facts and insert a footnote to a reliable source where it can be verified rather than just delete the whole thing. Blanking entire sections prevents progress towards sourcing and should only be done when the information is incorrect. Lacking sources and incorrect are not the same thing. I took a quick look at the sections on those pages and did not see any obvious errors. Does it make sense to remove a large amount of error free text just because it lacks a footnote? The templates call attention to the missing footnotes. But, you could also do that yourself to improve the article. I noticed that some of the award articles did have reference that included some of the info on the list. It just wasn't all on the same page. --mikeu ^talk 07:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks it makes sense now. 86.190.207.115 (talk) 14:30, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

	Hoping you enjoyed the recently-held in-person Art+Feminism meetup, we cordially invite you continue your participation by joining the virtual worldwide online event hosted by Women in Red. March 2016 (Women's History Month)

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 19:48, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Sunday July 16, 1-5pm: New England Wiknic

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" at John F. Kennedy Park, near Harvard Square, Cambridge, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck. Sunday July 16 New England Wiknic (also on Facebook) 1–5pm - come by any time! Look for us by the Wikipedia / Wikimedia banner! We hope to see you there! --Phoebe (talk) 16:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Hello Mu301. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of WWRO-LP, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: a merge to List of radio stations in South Carolina is possible and preferable to deletion per WP:ATD-M. Thank you. SoWhy 12:04, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

That sounds better. --mikeu ^talk 03:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Mu301. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of KCEI-LD, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Radio stations don't qualify for A7.Seek other deletion-alternatives. Thank you. Winged Blades^Godric 02:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll reread the criteria and the review the page in light of that. --mikeu ^talk 02:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mu301, I noticed that you and Arianewiki1 (also noted in their talkpage) are the main writers of Alpha centauri page. Would you two be interested in submitting the article for academic peer review via the WikiJournal of Science? It appears that a while back it was submitted to to an early version of the journal (then called "Second Journal of Science") though it has changes a lot since then. See articles in prep for the first issue here & further info here. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 12:03, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@Evolution and evolvability: I have not made significant contributions to that article, but I did participate in the GA review a couple of years ago. A few issues were brought up that still have not been addressed. The entire View from this system section is overly long and given undue weight. Very little of that info is encyclopedic. There is a great deal of speculation in sections such as Theoretical planets (among others.) While some of this is sourced there appears to be some synthesis that goes beyond the original references. Overall, I would assess this as a weak candidate for GA. It does not stay focused on the topic and present the essential information in a concise and clear manner. IMHO, it would require a great deal of copyediting before it would be ready to be considered for any journal. My main interest in the article was that I thought the review might lead to collaborative improvements. However, the nominators were unresponsive and the nomination was essentially abandoned. --mikeu ^talk 13:03, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for the explanation. I see what you mean about the article's shortfalls. Hopefully it will be updated some day. I might email a few astronomers to see if they'd be interested in updating it in collaboration with some more experienced wikipedians. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 23:19, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Good news, a set of 4-8 astronomers and physicists have agreed to help update the Alpha centauri article. Some got together at the EWASS2018 conference, and the others are from NASA Ames. I'll make a post on the Alpha centauri talk page so that there's a record there too. None have previously edited Wikipedia (to my knowledge), so if you happen to be able to help keep an eye on the page they conceivably may need help with formatting etc. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 04:19, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

@Evolution and evolvability: did anything ever come of this? The article does look better though I woudn't rate it GA at this stage. Let me know if I can help. --mikeu ^talk 01:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Mu301: Sadly not really. There was initial enthusiasm, but it slipped down the priority list and fizzled out. I'll send a reminder email around just in case through. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 22:50, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I am writing to ask for a review and reversal of the deletion of the wikipedia entry about me and my project, Noble Ape. The entries deleted were created by a series of listeners to my podcasts from 2007 through to about 2013. To be clear, I am only interested in the reversal for Noble Ape and Tom Barbalet on Wikipedia. The other two articles are less important to me.

While I appreciate the articles that were deleted were not ideal, the articles Tom Barbalet and Noble Ape did represent my work in a form which was comparable to others who have contributed a similar extent to the field of artificial life and still actively represented on Wikipedia - OpenWorm, Critterding, Avida, Boids, Polyworld.

They also show through Wikipedia and external academic references (http://www.nobleape.com/sim/#Academic) that my work is not a walled garden. It has contributed to a number of different areas and been used by Apple and Intel for their development.

As the article on Artificial life organizations also shows I have also fostered a community of developers and dialogue in the field of artificial life.

Probably unknown to you through this process is that a number of the external references to Noble Ape are currently being suppressed through payment to Google and other search sources by a comedian who aggressively promoted a comedy tour and album under the same name from 2016 to the present. This has lowered any chance of finding external references to Noble Ape.

I continue to work on Noble Ape to this day totaling more than ten hours per week on average. This is a voluntary effort to further ideas in social evolution, philosophy and open source software. I appreciate that working on Wikipedia is also a voluntary effort. I thank you for your time and considering my request to appeal this deletion.

Barbalet (talk) 23:44, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Looking through the reference, I don't see that M87* is an actual name - it's just the shorthand used in that particular article. Is there some reason to believe the naming extends or will extend beyond that article? Tarl N. (discuss) 15:52, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I see there is a discussion of some sort already on User talk:AhmadLX, I'll take the discussion there. Tarl N. (discuss) 15:56, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Mu301, I marked https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=&lang=&q=Draft:Astrometric_solving for deletion since I created the article already. A assume i didn't place the delete mark correctly. Can you delete the draft? sorry for the double entry. Han.k1959 (talk) 18:35, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

Please stop your disruptive editing at BNC connector and Audio and video interfaces and connectors. A court document (which is different to your claim anyway is not a valid cite for the name of the connector. BNC connector contains reliable references for the correct name. 86.132.158.101 (talk) 18:23, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Baby Neill Constant. Since you had some involvement with the Baby Neill Constant redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:45, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

You removed an authoritative reference that cites findings of fact based on contemporary expert testimony. (fyi, I wasn't the only one who reverted your removal, see the edit history) If you can provide a reference that supports your claim, please do so. Otherwise, your statement that "Every engineer knows..." in the edit summary is WP:OR. Also, please centralise discussion at Talk:BNC_connector#Baby_Neil_Constant. --mikeu ^talk 18:29, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at SunPCi, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. As you did in Special:Diff/931184374 despite this newly added contents not meeting reliable sources requirements, and using "better sources needed" to leverage introduction of improperly cited materials. Graywalls (talk) 00:19, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Reverts including 3rd within 24 hours is not against the rules. Your allegation that I'm gaming is unjustified. Reverting the FOURTH time just outside of 24 hours would be something else but no fourth reversion occurred, so why are you alleging I have gamed the system? Graywalls (talk) 08:17, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Charles E. Apgar at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Morgan695 (talk) 16:05, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi! What are we trying to do here? I deleted it thinking that the file page had been deleted (yes, I should have checked), then released that it had not been so restored the status ante quem. If the aim is to delete the local copy of the file, I think the way to go about it is to add a {{Now Commons}} template to it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:50, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: I don't see the file there and the log shows that it was deleted in 2008 less than a week after copying to commons.[1] Am I missing something? Adding the Now Commons tl would just recreate the page.[2] --mikeu ^talk 22:31, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

You're right of course – the system successfully fooled me (File talk:HamRadioGirl.jpg shows the File tab as a blue link even now). Anyway, on to the next ... Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:05, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi. This is not just a book review on a blog, but a review article on a highly-professional, peer-reviewed, open access forum for intellectual inquiry. Please see who is behind it: https://social-epistemology.com/who-we-are/ and also - what is this forum: https://social-epistemology.com/about/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.175.33.164 (talk) 10:14, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Please followup at Talk:Philosophy of conspiracy theories. --mikeu ^talk 17:29, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Charles E. Apgar you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 16:20, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

The article Charles E. Apgar you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Charles E. Apgar for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 23:01, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Mu301:,

Thank you for completing the participation form for the Wikimedia Foundation Learning and Leadership Development project. We have been emailing you with further instructions to set up your interview. Please check your email for further details. We look forward to speaking with you! LMiranda (WMF) (talk) 17:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

• T.pranto10 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Radio Boral (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Because I am a job holder at this company. T.pranto10 (talk) 22:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@T.pranto10: Thanks for your contributions and welcome to Wikipedia. I'll take at thi look at this draft in the next couple of days. --mikeu ^talk 11:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I've made a comment concerning the review of Draft:Mitchell Green. DGG ( talk ) 23:40, 22 June 2022 (UTC) User talk:Mu301/Archive 9