User talk:Qflib

This is Qflib's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2

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

	The Citation Barnstar
	Thanks for finding Florian G. Kaiser's 2018 induction to the International Association of Applied Psychology to demonstrate notability! With that established, we were able to overhaul and keep a great BLP article. BluePenguin18 🐧 ( 💬 ) 14:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! My very first barnstar, too. Cheers! Qflib (talk) 17:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 5th June the text in the section 'Discovery and preparation' was replaced (by Smokefoot) with a text that does not explain how the spectrum of methylene was discovered. The earlier version (much of which was written by me) does explain this. Can you replace this latter version of the section by the earlier version? I really give up on Wiki and warn all students not to rely on what they read there since they do not know the credibility of the writer. But then I have told you this before! This message written by bunkerpr Bunkerpr (talk) 15:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to get into an edit war, and would rather ask about this on the article's Talk page before proceeding. To that end; when he made the edit he also made the following comment: "Radicality is not a word in IUPAC or March and other tightening. A lot of text suggests that it is pasted in from another source". Can you address these assertions? Qflib (talk) 16:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that AI makes Wikipedia redundant so I am not planning any more use of Wikipedia. Thanks for your contributions. 2607:FEA8:BD80:80:F14B:8F9A:D3E1:B756 (talk) 12:24, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In February 2022 it was edited that Marie Janin was acting as director of GOGBOT between 2015 and 2022. This is not correct. She worked as producer and later curator of the festival. Kees de Groot was the lone director from 2015 on, until Jeffrey Hoffman was hired as financial director between 2021 and 2023. In 2023 Guido Bertling was hired as managing director replacing Kees de Groot.

I removed the mention about Marie Janin (me), as I dont want to be wrongly associated to this position. 188.206.64.219 (talk) 10:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see. These things work better if you use the Summary box to explain why you are making an edit. In addition, we do need sources to verify the information that is presented. Can you give me a source to confirm what you're saying? Qflib (talk) 21:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bobby Cohn was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Requires more citations for statements made in the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Stephan Irle and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I'll fix that. Careless of me! Qflib (talk) 20:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Qflib! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

..says nothing about dropping "the" for institutions. Special:Diff/1206134506/1239229425 .. am I missing something? That's all I could find. -- GreenC 02:39, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:College_and_university_article_advice under "Naming conventions." Qflib (talk) 16:34, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But you're right, I guess it's not in the MOS. I was mistaken about that. Qflib (talk) 16:34, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Short cut here: WP:NC-UNI Qflib (talk) 17:21, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Qflib, I added the UPE tag to article because the creator was just blocked as an WP:UPE sock but I also see you have done some work on it so if you think the article it meets WP:NPOV I have no issue with you removing it. S0091 (talk) 20:58, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I was trying to get it there but it looks like the whole article got wiped out! A strange result. I understand the sock issue of course, but the page is the page and for this to follow a positive and of the subject for notability was surprising. Also a little annoying tbh since I did spend some time trying to make it better. Qflib (talk) 01:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For my own records…Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pavlos Savvidis Qflib (talk) 01:14, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see what happened. WP:G5 Qflib (talk) 02:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Stephan Irle. Thanks! Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephan Irle, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Reba16 (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kamala Harris on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see no way to be helpful in that discussion. Qflib (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but this is Phil Bunker letting off steam about Wiki to you again! There is a 'box' at the beginning of this Wiki that begins with the unbelievable quote 'A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. I presume that the writer of this box takes me as this 'major contributor.' Does that mean that if you know a subject you will have a conflict of interest if you write about it? I believe that I really know this subject but I guess I should not put stuff into this wiki page. I was thinking about trying to completely rewrite this Wiki but clearly since I would not be able to avoid referring to some of my own work it would all be removed as a conflict of interest. Can you please do whatever is necessary to get this 'box' removed? 2607:FEA8:BD80:80:9ECA:7916:8D1B:2F24 (talk) 15:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC) P.S. I am worried that somebody will remove, in the Molecular symmetry Wiki, the section'Molecular rotation and molecular nonrigidity' that I wrote and which I believe is very important for a full understanding of molecular symmetry. I was annoyed that smokefoot removed my carefully written paragraph about the spectroscopic discovery of the methylene radical by Herzberg and Shoosmith in the wiki for methylene, but I guess the Wiki reading community will have to suffer in ignorance of the discovery of methylene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunkerpr (talk • contribs) 18:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry - of course, you're very frustrated, and I understand that.

What Wikipedia editors look for is for folks to write about subjects that they are experts in, using sources that they themselves did not write. When folks are perceived to have a conflict of interest on a particular subject, they are expected to declare that they have at least the potential for a COI on their own page, and not do any editing themselves on that subject, but instead put edit requests on article talk pages and leave the writing to others. Those would be good steps for you to take, I think.

I would personally think that the box is overkill if it only applies to one section of the article, and I could look at whether I can move the notification to the section in question. At that point, probably the only way to get the box removed wold be for someone else to rewrite that section of the article, using a variety of sources inztead of/ in addition to the ones to your own work. I wish I could be more helpful but this is all I can see to do. Qflib (talk) 19:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A pity that so much has now been changed. It is detrimental to the full description of the subject. Hopefully students will find out from their profs which books to read about this! It is specially a pity that the pdf file at the end of the article has been removed. I guess if Mossbauer wrote a Wiki on the Mossbauer effect it would be removed as a COI! Bunkerpr (talk) 14:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely would, if he extensively cited his own work. But if he wrote about the topic while not citing his own papers and left those citations to others to make, and declared his COI on his Talk page, that would be considered legit. Qflib (talk) 17:51, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have clarified the discussion of the resonance raman spectrum of ethylene. I know it will get removed but what else can I do. I feel that this section has been spoilt. And I certainly would prefer to read Mossbauer than some interpretation of his work. Have a nice day, Phil

PS It would be nice if somebody could add a reference to the book by Per Jensen and me in this wiki! 2607:FEA8:BD80:80:9ECA:7916:8D1B:2F24 (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]