User talk:Lithopsian

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback|your username}} on my talk.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|Lithopsian}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Aradial Networks

Added new article Aradial Networks, very simple and similar to Aptilo Networks I hope it will be approved this time.

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited V528 Carinae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WISE (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) 11:15, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fake star name pointing to star article

You seem experienced, so I ask you. I have found this misleading redirect page [1] where the reported fake name Urodelus is pointing to Epsilon Ursae Minoris. Do you know what is the best way to remove this redirect without going through the process of nominating it for deletion? Eynar Oxartum (talk) 10:56, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really an expert on Wikipedia policies and procedures. Redirects are not especially easy to delete, partly because there is generally very little cost and confusion by even a poor or unlikely redirect title. You might try for a speedy delete but I'm not sure if it will go through as an "implausible typo or misnomer". Other than that it needs the full discussion, although there isn't likely to be much discussion for something this obscure. I'll watch and pipe up if you request a delete. Lithopsian (talk) 13:19, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will think about it, and I will let you know. Eynar Oxartum (talk) 16:28, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Arianewiki1 (talk) 14:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi L,

You left a comment on a page that I created stating that it requires better references. The information on the page is as I have received it from the professor himself. I might have changed a bit of English. But most of it is the way the professor or the scientist sent it to me.

Where do I find references to personal comments of these professors and scientists?

Annakoppad (talk)Annakoppad —Preceding undated comment added 06:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that can be difficult but Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a newspaper. You may know something, but for Wikipedia it needs to be verifiable. This is especially important in biographies of living people, for obvious reasons. I've only tagged the information that is uncited since it does not appear to be particularly contentious, but another editor would be quite justified in simply removing it all, so there is some incentive to finding published sources. Full policy guidelines are here. When I get time, I will come back to the astrophysics part - that's more my field and it does need to be changed. Lithopsian (talk) 22:31, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Planetary transits and occultations

Thanks for your comments on Planetary transits and occultations. I lifted this material from two other pages that appeared to have duplicated it. I have now researched and added some additional citations, but I still can't find verification of some of it, so I've left them as "citation needed". Perhaps some kind soul will be able to find these. Portnadler (talk) 12:04, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's better than before you started on it, which is always a good thing. Lithopsian (talk) 22:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User group: New Page Reviewr

Hello Lithopsian.

Based on the patrols you made of new pages during a qualifying period in 2016, 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.

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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Lithopsian. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review - newsletter

Hello Lithopsian,

Breaking the back of the backlog

We now have 812 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .[reply]

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Regor

Hello Lithopsian,

I understand that I am just an amateur, but my change was totally justified. "Regor" is another name for "Gamma Velorum". It´s at least better than a dash.

Please reconsider your action.

45.35.9.242 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.35.9.242 (talk) 05:21, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review - newsletter #2

Hello Lithopsian,

Please help reduce the New Page backlog

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

Improve the tools: Vote here.
Reduce your review load: Vote here

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .[reply]

Sorry!

Sorry, didn't mean to rollback you on NW Puppis; accidentally rollbacked the wrong page! -IagoQnsi (talk) 15:10, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

L1 Puppis

Is it a correct redirect?Xx236 (talk) 13:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

L1 Puppis is intended to redirect to OU Puppis. Is your question because it was getting messed up by the displaytitle template? I think it is all OK now. Lithopsian (talk) 16:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VY Orionis

You missed a publication called "Notes on VY Ori", which is about both VY Ori and VV Ori. Also, if you look up 2MASS J05333588-050132, there are some archives. SpaceDude777 (talk) December 16, 2016

Roffey Park Institute

Hello there. I've haven't logged into Wikipedia for a few days which is why I missed the speedy deletion of Roffey Park Institute. I create the article because I do believe that it is a notable UK management research institution that has been around from the 1940s (I think). I was hoping that others (or indeed myself) night be able to contribute to it. Now the page has been deleted, I can't quite remember what the article looked. Can it be reinstated? Thanks Seaweed (talk) 15:16, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can ask the deleting admin (not me, the one that actually did the delete) to restore the page to your userspace so you can work on it some more. They will usually do this, although it's no guarantee the article will be acceptable in the future. Only in very unusual circumstances would they restore it directly to article space in the hope of someone doing some more work. Be careful about attempting to replace it since replacement of a deleted article with something essentially the same is frowned-upon. This would be a good time to read the WP:NOTABILITY guidelines since you will ultimately have to meet those or the article will get deleted again, speedily or otherwise. An article will only be speedily deleted if it makes no credible claim of significance, but may still be deleted after discussion if it makes claims and still turns out not to be notable. A notable organisation might still be speedily deleted if you neglected to mention the reasons why it is so famous. I also seem to remember the article might have been overly promotional? Maybe not, but watch out for that (and copyright) especially when you're sourcing material from the company itself. Lithopsian (talk) 20:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that information. I'm managed to find a cached version of the page and I now remember it was just a single sentence and small company information. I don't think anyone else had edited the page, so perhaps Roffey Park Institute is not as notable as I thought it was. I'm not connected to them in any way, so it wasn't promotional. I'll leave it as deleted. Seaweed (talk) 17:09, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SOL3

SOL3 is an established business from the Philadelphia area, as well within the sneaker community. It's a trademarked, patented product that has been very successful in the footwear industry and deserves notoriety. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madeinphilly (talk • contribs) 00:05, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is gone. I'm sure that everything you say is true, real product, real company, real sales, trademark, patents, and all the rest, but that's not what counts. Might be time to read up on notability. Articles which don't meet the notability criteria will be deleted. If they don't even attempt to establish notability, or if they cross other lines such as copyrighted text or excessively promotional tone, then they will be speedily deleted. Remember that Wikipedia is here to provide information on subjects that a significant number of people globally might be tempted to search, not to advertise every company trying to get noticed. You may also wish to read the policies on paid editing and conflict of interest. It is not prohibited to write about subjects that you have a close connection to, or even that you have been paid for, but it is important to be fully open to avoid any accusations of bias. Lithopsian (talk) 12:19, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UDF objects

I understand why VY Orionis or articles about stars with no significant sources would be AfDed, but although the Hubble Ultra-Deep Field (UDF) object-related articles do not have lots of sources, they are somewhat important. I create UDF object articles because it would be helpful for Wikipedia to have lots of articles about galaxies that are almost as old as the Universe. SpaceDude777 (talk) - December 22, 2016 - 7:33 UTC

Not entirely up to me. We're about to find out what others think, fingers crossed. I'll give my opinion though :) First, WP:NASTRO is quite clear. Not naked eye, no significant coverage, not in Wikipedia. The reason is obvious enough: there are billions of astronomical objects and all except a few thousand are simply uninteresting to anyone that would want to use Wikipedia as a source. Specific to the UDF catalogue, do you plan on creating 10,000+ articles about them? Probably not (hopefully not!), so you are cherry-picking "interesting" ones. I and one or two other people have been approving some of them that make some sort of claim to notability even if they don't quite meet WP:NASTRO (eg. closest UDF object), but creating a one-line stub just because you identified a blob on an image doesn't really cut it IMO. If even you can't find anything to say about it, probably there isn't anything to say about it. If you think the UDF is important, perhaps a better place to focus your enthusiasm would be Hubble Ultra-Deep Field. It is currently rated as start-class, but could easily become C-class. For UDF objects which don't rate their own article, they can always be an entry in a list or an image in a gallery. Lithopsian (talk) 19:57, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-STARRS Sky Survey Images now available

I just thought I'd let you know that recently, Pan-STARRS 1 released one of the largest sky surveys yet, and images of astronomical objects can be accessed at http://ps1images.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/ps1cutouts (you just type an object's name in the box), and read that Pan-STARRS 1 data and images can be used for publications and commercial use as long as they are acknowledged (http://ipp.ifa.hawaii.edu/). So, for articles for astronomical objects that don't have images, we can use Pan-STARRS 1 images. If I'm wrong, please notify me. SpaceDude777 (talk) December 30, 2016: 2:57 UTC.

Could be. Have you asked any of the copyright experts on Wikimedia? Lithopsian (talk) 18:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete page

Dear Lithopsian,

I was working on that from the root of that group (https://www.geni.com/people/Karumuttu-Thiagarajan-Chettiar/6000000003215947491 & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karumuttu_Thiagarajan_Chettiar,) Especially mahathma gandhiji wore loin cloth at karumuttu thiagarajan chettiar house 251 west masi street. (https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Karumuttu_Thiagaraja_Chettiar_the_textil.html?id=44ftAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y) since i collect all information about the 4th generation, i did start with vee technologies http://www.veetechnologies.com/profile/our-roots.htm, and even sona valliappa group also am working in that http://www.valliappa.com/sonagroup/promain.htm). this current generation from the root.

So please let me know how i can continue to update this information to wikipedia