User talk:Drbogdan/Archive 9
 |
|---|
| 24 December 2024 |
|
ART: Renoir's "Luncheon of the Boating Party” (1881) – Since 1923, At The *Phillips Gallery* In Washington, DC – Near My Apartment During My *GW University* Days – NEWS (11/24/2020).
Clickable image of the Luncheon of the Boating Party (1881) by Pierre-Auguste Renoir (The Phillips Collection, Washington, D.C.). Place your mouse cursor over a person in the painting to see their name; click to link to an article about them.
.jpg)
Clickable image: Clicking on the labels will open a new article.
Interactive image map of the global topography of Mars, overlain with locations of Mars Memorial sites. Hover your mouse over the image to see the names of over 60 prominent geographic features, and click to link to them. Coloring of the base map indicates relative elevations, based on data from the Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter on NASA's Mars Global Surveyor. Whites and browns indicate the highest elevations (+12 to +8 km); followed by pinks and reds (+8 to +3 km); yellow is 0 km; greens and blues are lower elevations (down to −8 km). Axes are latitude and longitude; Polar regions are noted. 
"2022 in science" moved to draftspace
[edit]Speedy deletion nomination of 2022 in science
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on 2022 in science requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ionmars10 (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- An article you recently created, 2022 in science, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "
Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 04:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)- Instead of spamming your page with like a bunch of these [sd notes], I'm just going to let you know now that I'm going to also nominate years 2032 to 2050. We're going to need to talk about this.
(edit conflict) –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 04:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- @MJL: @Ionmars10: Thank you for your comments - and efforts - seems creating the basic starting pages (in outline form) of "2022 in Science" inclusive to "2050 in science" - without more sources and related - could have been a better effort on my part after all - seemed, at the time, doing the pages in a batch effort would be better than doing the pages individually at some later time - guess not - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- [Thank you for the ping] Yeah, probably lol. Well, you got at least one outline to work with now! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 14:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- @MJL and Drbogdan: I've deleted the 2022 and beyond pages. Drbogdan, I appreciate the effort and thought. Just a bit too soon for those. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- [Thank you for the ping] Yeah, probably lol. Well, you got at least one outline to work with now! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 14:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- @MJL: @Ionmars10: Thank you for your comments - and efforts - seems creating the basic starting pages (in outline form) of "2022 in Science" inclusive to "2050 in science" - without more sources and related - could have been a better effort on my part after all - seemed, at the time, doing the pages in a batch effort would be better than doing the pages individually at some later time - guess not - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
- Instead of spamming your page with like a bunch of these [sd notes], I'm just going to let you know now that I'm going to also nominate years 2032 to 2050. We're going to need to talk about this.
Your Articles for creation: 2022 in science has been accepted
[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
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 .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
DGG ( talk ) 18:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)"Christina Koch" astronaut - time spent in space
[edit]Hi! - Just wanted to mention I updated Christina Koch to reflect that she attained the record of longest *single* spaceflight as opposed to the overall record - the reference you cited clearly indicates this. Just a heads up! :) Jewell D D (talk) 00:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Jewell D D: Thank you for your comments - they're appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:30, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- Brief followup - a relevant NYT reference[1] has been added to the "Christina Koch" article - should be ok - please comment if otherwise of course - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:55, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ Kowal, Mary Robinette (February 6, 2020). "Christina Koch Lands on Earth, and Crosses a Threshold for Women in Space - The astronaut completed three all-female spacewalks and set a record for time in space, but you should remember her for much more". The New York Times. Retrieved February 6, 2020.
"Timothy Leary" edits
[edit]There has been extensive discussion on Talk. It is difficult to build consensus when only one other person appears to be reading Talk. If you have knowledge of the subject matter, your involvement would be appreciated. BillHaywood (talk) 17:33, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- @BillHaywood: Thank you for your comments - seems WP:CONSENSUS for your edits is required before adding them to the main article - there's no such agreement at the moment - seems some editors have taken issue with the edits; while still other editors may be aware of your edits but, by choosing not to post support, may not be agreeable to them - this may (or may not) change in time - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:05, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, regarding this revert by Deacon Vorbis, see also Talk:Quadratic formula#Po-Shen Loh. 
Cheers! - DVdm (talk) 14:25, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
- @DVdm: Thank you very much for your comments - and link to the talk-page re the edit-add of the NYT reference[1] to the "Quadratic equation" article - yes - *entirely* agree - NYT is not an official professional source for the Quadratic equation - no problem whatsoever - with the revert or otherwise - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ Chang, Kenneth; Corum, Jonathan (February 5, 2020). "This Professor's 'Amazing' Trick Makes Quadratic Equations Easier - Looking for the answers to ax² + bx + c = 0? A mathematician has rediscovered a technique that the ancient Babylonians used". The New York Times. Retrieved February 6, 2020.
"More Music from Peter Gunn" and "The Music from Peter Gunn" are two different albums (both 1959). Therefore a redirect from "More Music from Peter Gunn" to "The Music from Peter Gunn" is wrong. I blanked it. What should be done with More Music from Peter Gunn? Remove? – Patricia Tegtmeier (talk) 07:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Result of Redirect Discussion: "KEEP" - Steel1943 (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of More Music from Peter Gunn
[edit]If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on More Music from Peter Gunn requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Postcard Cathy (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
"More Music from Peter Gunn" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect More Music from Peter Gunn. Since you had some involvement with the More Music from Peter Gunn redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Reply @Patricia Tegtmeier, Postcard Cathy, and Deacon Vorbis: - Thank you for your recent notes re "More Music from Peter Gunn" WP:Redirect - the following comment was added to the Redirect discussion => * Comment - as OA of the Redirect, whatever is decided by WP:CONSENSUS is *entirely* ok with me, no problem whatsoever - hope this helps in some way - Drbogdan 14:01, 1 March 2020 (UTC) - Thanks again for your notes - Drbogdan (talk) 14:12, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks to everyone involved! – Patricia Tegtmeier (talk) 00:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
"Hemolithin" - History section
[edit]Dear Dr Bogdan, The Hemolithin wiki article would benefit from a History of the research - this might encourage more serious scientific discussion. I need to send via Email a word file for you to place at the end of the current wiki Hemolithin. May I do this - there is a graph time line and taxt - I cannot add the graph image without your help? Julie mcgeoch@fas.harvard.edu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcgeoch (talk • contribs) 14:39, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
- @Mcgeoch: (Note: copy of this reply also sent via email) Thank you very much for your Wikipedia comments - and suggestions - can't promise anything at the moment, but can look at your suggested material and see what might be useful (best if cited in some way in "reliable sources" => "Wikipedia:Reliable sources", otherwise the material may be considered "original research" => "WP:NOR" - which may not be allowed) - and what may be permitted depending on current Wikipedia policies and practices - hope this helps in some way - at least for starters - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
"Higgs boson"
[edit]Hello sir. I currently have no idea of how to direct message you, however, I need to inquire an old and seemingly obsolete question in some eyes, what exactly is the so called "Higgs Boson"? I've done research on it and have found long and similarly vague answers from all sorts of sources, and I've found that you of all people may be able to help me, seeing as you're qualified for alot of things, may you explain it in a way of simple manner to me? I've asked all sorts of people and they've only produced vague and bad awnsers to me, so now I'm putting my hope in a stranger online SCP 1174 (talk) 06:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- @SCP 1174: - Thank you for your comments - seems the best answer to this is on the "Higgs boson" Wikipedia article itself - however - a simpler version may be found on the "Simple Wikipedia" at the following link => "simple:Higgs boson" - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! Drbogdan (talk) 12:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
"Fomalhaut b"
[edit]Thanks for helping edit the article to keep it up-to-date. I rewrote the lead section a bit, but it's going to need a lot of work. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 15:49, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Дрейгорич: Thank you for your comments - and efforts on the "Fomalhaut b" article - should note (if you're presently unaware) that a related discussion is on the talk-page at => "Talk:Fomalhaut b#Fomalhaut "b" is not a planet" - Thanks again for your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:56, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
"Windows XP"
[edit]Development status information - Base support ended on April 14, 2009 - Extended support ended on April 8, 2014 - Full support ended on -> August 31, 2019 <- found wrong information, the right would be: -> May 21, 2019 <- because on January 24, 2020 I had made a video updating the operating system. had taken the information from the wiki's print page that day - the video is this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zmKaXMQhLI the minute 3:08 the photo information is shown - Brazilian Video. if i'm wrong, please just say. - Albertvmaia (talk • contribs) 12:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Albertvmaia: Thank you for your comments - seems you may be right about the date - however - a citation from a WP:Reliable Source (other than a Youtube video and related), supporting the new date information, would be even more helpful I would think - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- Windows XP (last update proof images WSUS) => https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w_ccbb-p8BZGwlIL9XsvZTFY8R24vHzs/view?usp=sharing - reference image to Brazilian video! - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zmKaXMQhLI - May 21, 2019! - Full support ended on August 31, 2019 - please ask for the edition of the Windows XP page. - in Full support ended on --> August 31, 2019 <-- --> May 21, 2019! <-- :) - Albertvmaia (talk • contribs) 04:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- I just want to conclude with these two photos are on the day they shoot the video for internet - I hope your doubts are over. page information: January 24, 2020! - Wiki: Windows XP (USA) - Wiki: Windows XP (Brazil) - Photo of evidence and annotated systems - Evidence of data! - I found it on my computer and remembered that I had saved it and enjoy and update Windows 7 and 8.1 today at the same time before recording my videos for 2023 and 2024 - if there is any change I will alert you - if nothing changes on the US page and not here is fine - matter closed! - Albertvmaia (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
- Windows XP (last update proof images WSUS) => https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w_ccbb-p8BZGwlIL9XsvZTFY8R24vHzs/view?usp=sharing - reference image to Brazilian video! - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zmKaXMQhLI - May 21, 2019! - Full support ended on August 31, 2019 - please ask for the edition of the Windows XP page. - in Full support ended on --> August 31, 2019 <-- --> May 21, 2019! <-- :) - Albertvmaia (talk • contribs) 04:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello. In the article LUCA, it is stated that "Studies from 2000–2018 have suggested an increasingly ancient time for LUCA. In 2000, estimations suggested LUCA existed 3.5 to 3.8 billion years ago in the Paleoarchean era,[7][8] a few hundred million years before the earliest fossil evidence of life (…). A 2018 study from the University of Bristol, applying a molecular clock model, places the LUCA shortly after 4.5 billion years ago, within the Hadean.[16][17]" I propose to add the information to the paragraph about LUCA in the section "Earliest life forms", I feel the update would be accurate. Thank you in advance. Have a nice day! --Jojnee (talk) 11:30, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Jojnee: Thank you for your comments - and recommended edit re LUCA - yes - agreed - seems the proposed edit would be ok - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again for your comments and all - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:14, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
PS. I apologise to bother you once again. Recently, I've edited the article Retroposon, I put a (wiki)link to "retropseudogenes" (processed pseudogenes) to make it more clear for readers. Because there seems to be no consensus regarding the proper terminology (e.g., some authors tend to use the words "retrogene" and "retropseudogene" interchangeably), I decided to use a term commonly employed by scientists—"retro(pseudo)genes". Since you're a scientist as well as an experienced Wikipedia user and pending changes reviewer, could I ask you to review the edit? Especially, I mean the way I added a link to the other article, I tried my best to do it properly, but is it OK with the WP standards? Thank you very much in advance! Cheers, --Jojnee (talk) 16:10, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Jojnee: Thanks for your comments - and suggested review - at first glance, and afaik atm, the edit re wikicode may be ok - however - there may be no mention of "retropseudogene" or "retro(pseudo)genes" in the cited reference - perhaps the language in the cited ref should be used? - iac - hope this helps in some way - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 17:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply, I appreciate it. Yes, I understand. Perhaps a good solution will be to cite in refs the book that I read. It states: Retro(pseudo)genes are products of reverse transcription of a spliced (mature) mRNA. (…) Retro(pseudo)genes like other retrotransposons have been inserted into the genome as double-stranded sequence generated from a single-stranded RNA. Processed pseudogenes, as sometimes retropseudogenes are called, have been generated (…) However, not all retroposed messages have to end up as pseudogenes. (p. 166). I planned to add it, but had some troubles while trying to prepare a proper citation format. --Jojnee (talk) 18:55, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for the recent edit. I wonder if it would be better to replace "the universal common ancestor" with a simple "the LUCA" in the second sentence (the one regarding a 2018 study). It is a small thing, but perhaps would save some space. Kind regards, --Jojnee (talk) 16:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Done @Jojnee: - Thank you for your comments - and suggestion - yes - *entirely* agree - the article has been updated - Thanks again - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 16:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
"Neutron star"
[edit]Just wanted to extend thanks for finding and adding that infographic! Wish I'd found it first ;) --Marx01 Tell me about it 11:40, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Marx01: - Thank you for your comment - if interested, there's two types of the infographic: Horizontal "(File:PIA23863-NeutronStars-Types-20200624.jpg |thumb|center|800px|Neutron Star Types (24 June 2020))" and Vertical "(File:PIA23863-NeutronStarTypes-20200624.jpg |thumb|center|800px|Neutron Star Types (24 June 2020))" - Besides the "Neutron star" article, the infographic may also be relevant to the "Magnetar" and "Pulsar" articles I would think atm - iac - Thanks again - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 11:59, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you! I'll send these out to the astro folks I work with! :D --Marx01 Tell me about it 12:50, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- --Orphaned non-free image File:Film1932-BlondeVenus-OriginalCriterionBluRayCover.jpg--
Thanks for uploading File:Film1932-BlondeVenus-OriginalCriterionBluRayCover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I found a CCR5 antagonist in May that showed promise for treating COVID-19 and have been following its progress. Last week the company announced that its phase 2 mild/moderate trial had achieved statistical significance for one of its endpoints and submitted an EUA based on those results and it's April phase 2b/3 severe/critcal trial that is underway. I noticed that it wasn't on the COVID-19 drug development page so I created an account and proposed text for it on the talk page. The edit was denied so I revised the entry, explained a bit about different classes of monoclonal antibodies and provided more background information. It is entirely possible that I am misunderstanding this biologic's significance for treating C19. It is also possible that I am misunderstanding the standards for inclusion on the page, but the feedback I received didn't communicate that in a way that I understood and the reasons provided for refusal seemed inaccurate. I was hoping that you would take a look at the discussion at Talk:COVID-19 drug development. If you choose to share any thoughts about the discussion or how I can improve in my research I would be grateful. --TwoCandlesInTheDark (talk) 02:42, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- @TwoCandlesInTheDark: Thank you for your comments - and request to review your suggested edit to the COVID-19 drug development article on the related talk-page - at first glance, seems your comments, and those of others (esp User:Zefr) are excellent - and appropriate for Wikipedia discussions re such issues - seems best to see how the discussion develops - others, more knowledgeable than I at the moment re the issue, may share further relevant comments I would think - in any case - hope this helps in some way - Thanks again for your own comments - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look and sharing your thoughts. Sometimes it is difficult to determine the merit of a position as a participant in a discussion. You have helped me align my enthusiasm with reality. I appreciate your assessment and agree that input from domain experts would be the best next step. TwoCandlesInTheDark (talk) 17:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
As a heads up, I have moved Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth to draft space at Draft:Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth per WP:TOOSOON. Notability hasn't been demonstrated, but given a release date in the near future, it may get there at some point. I've also removed links and redirects as appropriate. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- --Orphaned non-free image File:ExtraterrestrialFirstIntelligentBeyondEarth-BookCover.jpg--
Thanks for uploading File:ExtraterrestrialFirstIntelligentBeyondEarth-BookCover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
"LocationOfEarth" - Kudos for your template
[edit]Dear Dr. Dennis Bogdan:
Would it please be possible for you to add left-right scrolling to the otherwise excellent "LocationOfEarth" template? I'm appealing to you, since you seem to have made the most extensive, recent formatting changes.
The "LocationOfEarth" template shows too wide for some screens. It needs a left-right scrollbar in those cases where it exceeds 100% of the available window width.
Being over-confident and adventuresome, I have tried and failed to use the "wide template", "scrolling", and "scrollable" templates, to add scrolling, and changing the "style" directive inside the template; I have failed. While I might aspire to be an emerging master editor of "math" notation (my own field), this job would appear to need a more masterful editor.
The only template that appears as if I could make it work is the "scrolling table" template, but that would require a conversion of the entire template into table format, rather than a minor tweak of its as-is formatting. That is more drastic than I'm comfortable with; it usually gets me in trouble. Could you please help?
Regards from Oregon/
Dr. Tom Lougheed
Astro-Tom-ical (talk) 02:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Astro-Tom-ical: Hello Tom - Thank you *very much* for your comments, kudos and request - they're all appreciated - my "LocationOfEarth" template was made with very basic skills and informations - some of my own earlier related template testing could be found here => "User:Drbogdan/sandbox-timelines-01" - and especially here => "User:Drbogdan/sandbox-timelines-01#Earth series" - I'm unable at this time to do more advanced template coding, including scrolling - however - several suggestions - you may like to experiment with this further yourself (perhaps in the "Template:LocationOfEarth/sandbox") - or - make a completely new and different template (similar, but this time with scrolling) - or - you may ask for advanced template help with this at "Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)" - I would think the advanced template coders there would be more than happy to help you with your template ideas - hope this helps in some way - Thanks again for your comments and all - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Dennis - Drbogdan (talk) 13:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
@Astro-Tom-ical: and others - Brief Followup - Seems the "Template:LocationOfEarth" itself may not continue to be available in article space for one reason or another (see here, here and, to some extent, here) - however - the underlying template source code may still be useful in some way - if interested, the underlying template source code is as follows:
{{multiple image|align=center|direction=horizontal|background color= |width= |caption_align=center|header_background= |header_align=center|header=[[Universe|Location of the Earth in the Universe]]|image1=The Earth seen from Apollo 17.jpg|width1=88|caption1=[[Earth]]|image2=Montagem Sistema Solar.jpg|width2=115|caption2=[[Solar System]]|image3=Rho Ophiuchi.jpg|width3=90|caption3=[[Gould Belt]]|image4=Milky Way Arms ssc2008-10.svg|width4=98|caption4=[[Orion Arm]]|image5=Artist's impression of the Milky Way (updated - annotated).jpg|width5=88|caption5=[[Milky Way]]|image6=Local Group and nearest galaxies.jpg|width6=120|caption6=[[Local Group|Local Group]]|image7=Local supercluster-ly.jpg|width7=93|caption7=[[Virgo Supercluster|Virgo SCl]]|image8=Observable universe r2.jpg|width8=90|caption8=[[Laniakea Supercluster|Laniakea SCl]]|image9=Observable Universe with Measurements 01.png|width9=90|caption9=[[Observable universe|Our Universe]]|footer_background= |footer_align=center|footer= }}
- Hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
This discussion more or less answers a question you once had. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Nominations for RfD
[edit]| Nominations for RfD |
|---|
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Phosphorus monoxide. Since you had some involvement with the Phosphorus monoxide redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Leyo 20:43, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Teslarati. Since you had some involvement with the Teslarati redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 23:31, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect China outbreak. Since you had some involvement with the China outbreak redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 03:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Genius (U.S. TV series. Since you had some involvement with the Genius (U.S. TV series redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 13:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
[[[File:Information.svg|30px]] A discussion is taking place to address the redirect The Trump Virus. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 6#The Trump Virus until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ZimZalaBim talk 19:27, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Keep. Many thanks to the IP for adding this to the target. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC) References
|
Nominations for TfD
[edit]| Nominations for TfD |
|---|
 Template:LocationOfEarth has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
|
Hi. Given this announcement[2] and new paper[1] ("Which stars can see Earth as a transiting exoplanet?"), it would be great to have an article on the 1,004 stars within 326 light-years that can spot Earth based on line of sight. Not sure what it would be called, however. Viriditas (talk) 07:59, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Viriditas: Good to hear from you - thank you for your comment - and suggestion - yes - saw the news[1][2][3][4][5] recently also - creating a related article seems like a good idea to me as well - possible article titles (for starters): "Earth as transiting exoplanet"; "Earth transiting Sun"; "Exoplanet Earth"; "Detecting Earth from distant stars" (current favorite); others? - in any case - Thanks again for your post - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Viriditas: Brief followup - decided to start the article as "Detecting Earth from distant stars", afterwards renamed to "Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems", (made "redirects" of the other suggested titles above at the moment) - can always change the article title later - hope this is *entirely* ok - Comments (and new article editing) Welcome of course - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Might want to start User:Drbogdan/Earth Transit Zone. I think that's the best subject title at this time. Viriditas (talk) 20:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Viriditas: Brief followup - decided to start the article as "Detecting Earth from distant stars", afterwards renamed to "Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems", (made "redirects" of the other suggested titles above at the moment) - can always change the article title later - hope this is *entirely* ok - Comments (and new article editing) Welcome of course - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ a b c Kaltenegger, L.; Pepper, J. (20 October 2020). "Which stars can see Earth as a transiting exoplanet?". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 499 (1): L111 – L115. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa161. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - ^ a b Letzer, Rafi (22 October 2020). "Aliens on 1,000 nearby stars could see us, new study suggests". Live Science. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
- ^ Friedlander, Blaine (21 October 2020). "Smile, wave: Some exoplanets may be able to see us, too". Cornell University. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
- ^ Carter, Jamie (22 October 2020). "Are We Being Watched? There Are 509 Star Systems With A Great View Of Life On Earth, Say Scientists". Forbes. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
- ^ Staff (2020). "5 Ways to Find a Planet". NASA. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
Nomination for AfD
[edit]Nomination of Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems 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/Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems 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. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Wow! Gone are the days when an editor could create a new article and work on it for a few minutes before being nominated for deletion. Drbogdan, I think the article can be kept, but given the obsessive paper pushers and bean counters that worship administrative rules and procedures, it would be more fruitful to move it to your user space where we can refine it first. Viriditas (talk) 19:40, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
@Viriditas and Prototyperspective: - Thanks for all your comments - and suggestions - related discussion at => "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems" - copies of the original article are now at => "User:Drbogdan/Earth Transit Zone" - And => "Draft:Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems" - And => "User:Drbogdan/sandbox-DetectingEarthAsExoplanet" - one of these may be a copy we can further expand I would think - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 21:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
- Done - NOTE: re Article for Deletion (AfD) discussion => "The result was KEEP". (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 09:41, 1 November 2020 (UTC) - added by Drbogdan (talk) 17:32, 15 November 2020 (UTC) - Stay Safe and Healthy !!
"Spaceflight" WikiProject notice
[edit]
|
The Downlink | The WikiProject Spaceflight Newsletter |
|---|---|---|
| WikiProject Notification |
| This is a one-time notification to all active WikiProject Spaceflight members. |
|---|
| The Downlink project page |
| I am notifying you, that The Downlink newsletter is starting up again, the first new issue will be published on the 1 November 2020. |
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
"Solar System" WikiProject notice
[edit]
Thank you for your contributions on articles related to the solar system. Given that interest, have you considered joining WikiProject Solar System? We are a group of members working to improve articles related to the solar system. Please add your name at the list of participants to join with us. Questions? Ask at the discussion page of the project. Thank you. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 17:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
"Timothy Leary" refs
[edit]Hi. Please do not use the Daily Mail as you did at Joanna Harcourt-Smith and Timothy Leary. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 16:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Robby.is.on: Thank you for your comments - yes - *entirely* agree - using a better ref[1] instead - should now be ok - iac - Thanks again - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 17:06, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- You too. :-) Happy editing, Robby.is.on (talk) 17:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ Staff (November 13, 2020). "Joanna Harcourt-Smith partner of Timothy Leary dies aged 74". News Colony. Retrieved November 15, 2020.
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
Thanks for uploading File:TV2000-The Strangerers-Poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
"Post-1932 politics" notice
[edit]
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-1932 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.
Just a standard note for the topic area. PackMecEng (talk) 21:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)