User talk:Lucent

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Lucent! My name is Ryan, aka Acetic Acid. I noticed that you were new and haven't received any messages yet. I just wanted to see how you were doing. Wikipedia can be a little intimidating at first, since it uses different formatting than other sites that use HTML and CSS. In the long run, though, you'll find that the WikiSyntax is a lot easier and faster than those other ways. Here are a few links to get you started:

There are a lot of policies and guides to read, but I highly recommend reading over those first. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Please be sure to sign your name on Talk Pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, along with a link to your user page. This way, others know when you left a message and how to find you. It's easier than having to type out your name, right? :)

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. We can use all the help we can get! Have a nice day. Sincerely, Ryan 10:39, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps they should be GFDL instead of PD? If I recall correctly, I took some (not all) of the pictures from UT Athletics, not from the Public Relations. And some were wallpapers free for downloading. But if you insist on taking those pics off, that is fine. I can replace them with pics from my very own camera (which will look almost exactly similar to the pics already on the page).--Zereshk 17:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions

Hey, thanks for the message. Your contributions seem okay. Doesn't look like you broke any rules. I see you reverted a bit of vandalism. Good job catching it. ;) Keep up the good work. You look like you're on the right track. Acetic Acid 01:03, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

UT pics

I replaced over half of the pics on the University of Tennessee page with my own photos. I replaced the pics I thought might raise questions about copyright vios. The other remaining pics, either I did not put up, or are from UT atheletics, or did not have copyright issues as I recall. But I think everything should be OK now. --Zereshk 07:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tilman Hausherr

Can you please revisit the AFD debate on this man. Apparently he's a well-known scientology critic and not just a programmer. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the other article about him, he sounds pretty cool. But a scientology critic seems sub-encyclopedic to me. I'm going to withdraw because Wikipedia is big on a lot of "small" things like open source software and Japanese animation, and apparently Scientology. --Lucent 09:07, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-African Congress

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! --Allen3 ^talk 21:04, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your comments, I have done a little research and changed the redirect into a simple stub. --Allen3 ^talk 00:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rsvpair

"Borderline sociopathic"? Please find a way to express yourself without personal attacks. "Complete lack of respect for Wikipedians and their community" is completely wrong. If you take a look at Template talk:US-airport you will see that they are willing to engage in discussion about ways to work with, not against, the Wikipedia community. Whether or not you think their link and their information belong on Wikipedia, you must behave civilly towards these new Wikipedia users. FreplySpang (talk) 00:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New PT based on QM

Hi Lucent.

You deleted my entry about New Periodic table based on quantum numbers from "Periodic table" article on the basis of "new research". But I believe that it should not be classified as such because the "New PT", that I reffered to in my edit, has been listed for a long time at meta-synthesis.com that, in turn, is listed among the external references under the Periodic table article.

I do not see why I can not pull out info from the sources listed as references to the article? Drova (talk) 05:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find this funny in that it seems you're trying to trap me in a maze of circular logic. That only works on Star Trek against the Borg. Meta-synthesis is not a reference, it's an external link. If you succeed in moving that link to the references section without opposition, I'll concede.--Lucent (talk) 04:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to trap you. I just misspoke. I meant "external link". I know that few articles (not mine) are in the works that were going to mention the New PT. One of them in "Foundations of Chemistry" by Dr.Philip Stewart of Oxford. The other, by Dr.Katya Walter from Austin, TX. I am not sure if they were printed yet, I have to find them. For now it will be kept among external links.

The Table is modified Left Step Periodic Table of Janet (1928) that shows quantum number "n" directly, follows the Madelung rule and allows easy readout of electronic configurations, which is extremely helpful for thouse who has to explain it to students. See this page. Drova (talk) 05:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need to add Left step Periodic table

How come article on Periodic Table does not have anything on Janet's Left Step Periodic Table, that lists spdf blocks in correct order in accordance with l=0,1,2,3.... while, it features such theoretically insignificant tables as the so called "alternative vertical" PT. [alternative vertical PT]? How about alternative IUPAC PT shown upside down? Would it be also acceptable? It would still list subshell blocks incorrectly, just like the normal one. The numerous books and articles were written about LSPT since 1928. This situation needs to be fixed.

Drova (talk) 21:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious that none of these "alternatives" are actually alternative; just simple formatting changes to the standard design due to possible limitations of browsers or screen size. The vertical table is not an alternative. You're reaching for the sake of your own argument.

There are dozens of alternate periodic tables, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Some, in my opinion, have advantages that outweigh the drawbacks as compared to the standard layout. If allowed three dimensions, I would expect aliens to point out elements on Stowe's periodic table in communication with us. Yours, for example, loses the continuity of atomic numbers. Is that a worthy tradeoff? Maybe it is. It's not for me to decide.

You have run into the Infomercial Dilemma in your attempt to promote what you believe to be a superior product. Infomercials very often offer products that are technically superior replacements to things we already use. The problem is that they 1) either make tradeoffs we are unwilling to make, or 2) are insufficiently better to warrant replacement. For the sake of argument, let's assume your problem is the second. To get a new generation to start using Ginsu knives or an alternative periodic table, it can't just be 10% better because the investment to reacclimate and replace the standard is much more than 10%. It must be two or three times better to supplant the status quo.

I wish you luck in promoting your specific rendition, but Wikipedia is absolutely not the place to take such a stand. Wikipedia is not an evaluator of scientific claims or arguments. Wikipedia is, by definition and purpose, the last place you will see your new periodic table, if it does successfully replace the current standard. If it's here before scientific journal articles, the back of textbooks, and other web sites, we are not doing our job as encyclopedia editors in consolidating scientific consensus.--Lucent (talk) 22:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Lucent,

I just stumbled on discussion about Adomah PT in one of the forums. I think this exchange would be a good answer to you comments: Canadian Content Forum.

(P.S. I am not a memeber of that forum.) Drova (talk) 20:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:EastTNChildrensHospitalLogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:EastTNChildrensHospitalLogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

clarification

I don't quite follow what is going on with the Yoix page... I am trying very hard to do the right thing, but new things keep popping up all the time. Could you please clarify what the copyright issue is with the Yoix page? Is it that some text from the Wikipedia page is similar to text on the AT&T research web site Yoix page? The way the Yoix page has been attacked recently I feel like it is a vendetta because I randomly put the Yoix periodic table link above yours.

Incidentally, is Lucent a trademark term -- can you use it in wikipedia without possible copyright infringement?

Seriously, please stop the persecution. --Jmocenigo (talk) 11:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

still?

Dear Michael,

I see you are, as of Sep 19, still in harassment mode as I found this note on my talk page:

Links to Yoix applications violate WP:LINKSTOAVOID item 8.

Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content, unless the article is about such rich media.

--Lucent (talk) 01:38, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

None of the links on the page fit this description. The documents at the URLs talk about applications that need Java, but the documents themselves, specifically their content, do not require any external applications. So, there is no issue here.

Given your association with ptable.com and that all your attention on the Yoix page began after I placed a link above your ptable.com link on the periodic table page on the possibly mistaken theory that newer things should be placed toward the top of a list, I think you may want to review Wikipedia:Ethical Code for Wikipedians and cease and desist from your harassment, since that is what it is.

Thank You.

Jmocenigo (talk) 18:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to this Wikipedian on his talk page. Any further communication from him will be reported to an administrator for harassment.--Lucent (talk) 19:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Periodic Plague

I see you've already squelched the insertion of the wacky periodic table in the only place where it might have been appropriate. Now it has spread to Close-packing of spheres, of all places. The contributor is unwilling to give up. (E.g., I feel strongly that the link in question has to stay.) You might like to keep an eye on this; Arthur Rubin and I can only do so much. — Xiong 熊 talk * 23:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:EastTNChildrensHospitalLogo.png

Thanks for uploading File:EastTNChildrensHospitalLogo.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 09:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission problem with Image:Andrew Divoff in 2008.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Andrew Divoff in 2008.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 20:56, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of FlightAware

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on FlightAware requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Flyguy088 (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SUL

Hello, I confirm that I'd like to usurp de:User:Lucent.--Lucent (talk) 08:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]