User talk:Geoffrey.landis

Talk Page for Geoff Landis

This is my talk page. If you're just looking for information, I also have a Wikipedia article: Geoffrey A. Landis. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 17:52, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you comment...

... on my request on Talk:Solar cycle - so that we can get the text back to what is actually supported by the references, as well as resolve that silly edit-war? --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 23:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've mostly been working on trying to get the Solar variation in readable shape-- haven't gone back to Solar cycle for a while. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 15:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I see it's edit-protected now, so I'm not going to do any editing on it any time soon. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 19:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The question is on whether we can get consensus to change "very low" to "low" with the reference to AR4 instead of TAR. This should be uncontroversial for both WMC and the ip-editor (in fact it should resolve the conflict :-)) - the reason i'm requesting you to look on it, is because you've edited the page recently, and thus should be part of a consensus to do an edit-protect request. Thanks. See Talk:Solar cycle#.22very_low.22_.3D.3E_.22low.22 --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 20:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm OK with either wording, actually. "needs further work" would probably be the phrase I'd use. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 23:53, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Geoffrey.landis. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Uploading_images#.22a_photograph_you_took.22.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- John of Reading (talk) 07:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

L-Price LED-Lamp

For universal use in other wiki-projects i uploaded your photo to the wikipedia commons with same comments and creator marks as you did. I hope you agree with that. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Philips_LED_bulbs.jpg Angerdan (talk) 11:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sure, put it anywhere you want it. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 23:20, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cajun Sushi Hamsters for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cajun Sushi Hamsters 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/Cajun Sushi Hamsters until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cajun Sushi Hamsters

While the AfD decision was 'delete', I'm betting that with some expansion and clearer sourcing from reliable third-party publications that this article could be improved enough to return to the encyclopedia. To that end, I've moved it to User:Geoffrey.landis/sandbox/Cajun Sushi Hamsters to allow you to work on it in your own time. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. - Dravecky (talk) 08:22, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Post and Pair, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marmion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BP

Geoffrey, I sympathize with your interest in placing the Wikipedia controversy in the BP article. However, I have to agree that it is prohibited by the rule against undue emphasis. There are far, far, far worse problems with that article, omissions of criminal proceedings, and other general issues caused by a BP editor and his friends. Given the technical background described on your user page, any help you can offer on the talk page and in the article would be greatly appreciated, as independent editors who are trying to improve that article have been simply overwhelmed. Also there are active discussions underway at various places on Wikipedia concerning the problem of PR reps and corporate employees on Wikipedia, and I am sure your input in those forums would be welcomed there as well. I only became aware of the BP situation and I personally think it is horrid that Wiki readers do not know that such activity is going on. So one thing that I have done is to propose a tag that can be placed on such article when corporate editors are running amok. Coretheapple (talk) 16:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that an editor, a very good one, disagrees with me and has placed the text back in the article. Still, I hope you expand your contributions beyond that issue. Coretheapple (talk) 16:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There may be problems with putting the material in the article. However, WP:UNDUE is a subset of NPOV. The material added (not the material cited, but the text of the article added) does not violate neutral point of view (or, I tried not to violate NPOV), so I think that it's a incorrect reason for deleting it. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 22:20, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Space Services Inc. may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. |}Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected, thanks. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 03:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Frederik Pohl - ITN

On 3 September 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Frederik Pohl, which you substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

Thank you for your work on this article. Bencherlite ^Talk 22:15, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Iodine pentoxide may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

ved=0CEsQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=decomposition%20of%20iodine%20pentoxide Google Books])</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:20, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RFC naked singularities in fiction

Good day, Dr. Landis:

I have enjoyed your work in Analog, so took note when I saw your name as an editor on some articles I've been editing in the last few weeks.

I've been on a personal quest to improve the listings of fiction about wormholes, black holes, White holes, and related unusual objects. I most recently noticed your name on the talk page for Naked singularities, commenting about a fiction listing there. I have added a question to that page about cross-linking fiction content, and if you are willing and have one, I would like to have your opinion on it. The question can be found here.

Best regards, Tacticus (talk) 06:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]