User talk:Electron9

Welcome!

Hello, Electron9, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Mak 20:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Protuberance

Hi E9,

My apologies for reverting without an explanation, it's the disadvantage of pop-ups. I had two reasons for reverting, one aesthetic, one rational:

First, your wikilink had a duplication of the term - [[Protuberance|protuberances]]. There's no need to put in a wikilink with a pipe for plurals, the markup or whatever the magic program is that changes code to text automatically captures the 's' after any word. [[Cats]] and [[Cat]]s are exactly the same when wikified: Cats and Cats.

Second, and this is the bigger reason - you wikilinked a term which had no entry and no re-direct. More plainly, there's no entry for Protuberance and a pet peeve of mine is redlinks. Second only to re-directs, damn I hate redirects in wikilinks. Fills me with rage. Anyway, given the rather limited use of the term 'protuberance', strictly anatomical and there's not much information that could be placed on an entry, I figured it would sit as a dead link for years 'cause it's an unlikely entry to be created. Had you created a page for 'protuberance' right after, I would have corrected the wikilink to [[protuberance]]s and left it in the article (though given the contents of an entry on protuberances, I would probably eventually nominated it for deletion or possibly rolled it into a larger entry of minor anatomical terms). Anyway, if you do create the entry, feel free to put the wikilink back in, and if I find other mentions of anatomical protuberances I'll link to the new article.

Hope that clears it up, apologies if I offended. WLU 21:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

People's Republic of China vs Republic of China

There are de facto two Chinas. One is called the Republic of China, this government was however run out of mainland China by the communists who established the People's Republic of China. The problem I think that you're having difficulty with is that there are two Chinas, one controls mainland China (PRC), and one controls Taiwan (ROC), but both lay claim to the whole of China.

It's a very confusing situation, but rest assured that Taiwan is actually run by the Republic of China. --Puellanivis 01:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

How to find requested but not found articles?

Some time ago I filled a request on bugzilla: bug 6373. Perhaps you would like to comment it or vote for it. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 21:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Abundance Paradox

The article you wrote, Abundance Paradox, is uncategorized. Please help improve it by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related articles. A stub marker or other template doesn't count - please put in an actual category in the article.Eli Falk 23:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Muscle

Good job on the muscle page. A point on style - usually you only wikilink the first instance of a word on the page, and you try to keep the article consistent throughout. Specifically, you used N rather than Newtons the first time, and wikilinked the second instance using the full word. I changed the second Newton to N and removed the wikilink. WLU 15:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a long article so I simple missed it, was a bit on a timeschedule and tired. You are absolutly right on Newton. I initially linked it because I thought "biology people" might have less grasp on physics matters. I try to make it as good as possible. And pray any faults will be caught by-many-eyes-watching ;) Electron9 21:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

If you hope your contributions will always be perfect, you're in for a lot of disappointment! Links are always good to add. Also, my preference for replies is on my talk page (otherwise I might miss it, my watchlist is over 300 pages so you're one of many that my just two eyes have to keep an eye on. Some prefer to watch the pages. Eh... if it's important, I always like it on my talk so I get the big orange box. Makes me feel important. WLU 22:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

HEC (html) has been proposed for deletion

I have proposed one of your articles for deletion. This can be discussed at the AfD page if you have any objections. NetOracle 23:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Diglog.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Diglog.png. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:PI-pad.png. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Pi-pad.png. The copy called Image:Pi-pad.png has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 13:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Little context in Nordisk Mobiltelefon (Sweden)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Nordisk Mobiltelefon (Sweden), by Leuko (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Nordisk Mobiltelefon (Sweden) is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Nordisk Mobiltelefon (Sweden), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Nordisk Mobiltelefon (Sweden) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

LM3875

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article LM3875, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Rambutan (talk) 12:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment tags in articles

Please don't "name and shame" Wikipedians in comment fields in articles. It's rude and uncalled-for. Chris Cunningham 19:43, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Well sorry for that but you did something rude by removing information that is actually correct and the labeled it as "unsourced and poss vandalism. generic tag because I've realised what a mess this is". Please check obvious facts next time before making such alteration. Electron9 20:05, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry about that, yeah. As for the tag, well, the article still reads like somebody's log-book just now, and it really does need seriously cleaned up. Chris Cunningham 20:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Well too many things has been unclear about the project for a long time so it kind of become little of a log. Though I find it easy to read. I hope any changes just won't drop information thoe. Electron9 20:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

MMC

Just to alert you to two guidelines in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages):

• Order of entries: "In most cases, place the items in order of usage, with the most-used meanings appearing at the top and less common meanings below."

"MultiMedia Commands" gets 12,000 Ghits,[1] "Microsoft Management Console" gets 734,000,[2] hence why I'm giving it priority. Also note that if you re-order alphabetically, as your edit summary stated,[3] Microsoft Management Console would still be above MultiMedia Commands.

• Individual entries: "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link."

I hope this helps clarify my reversions of your edits. Regards, --DeLarge 13:54, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Seems alright. Electron9 20:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Kainuun Sanomat

A tag has been placed on Kainuun Sanomat, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. WebHamster 12:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Amorous

A tag has been placed on Amorous, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. WebHamster 20:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sv-PTS logotyp.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sv-PTS logotyp.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Strip board

A tag has been placed on Strip board, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the 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. Davidovic 23:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Project VGA DSC05909.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Project VGA DSC05909.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm no hero with wikipedia but was pointed to this issue. Tagged it with GFDL, hopefully correct. Wacco (talk) 13:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I have put a question to the photographer, so I'll know soon for sure weather it's ok or not soon. Electron9 (talk) 17:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Author have released the picture under GFDL projectvga.org Electron9 (talk) 05:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

RAF

I don't care where the redirect leads but you must clean up the "what links here" first. It's no good leaving a bunch of links to a disambiguation page. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 23:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

NComm

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article NComm, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of NComm. 00:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Secure Digital card edit

I have reverted your recent edit of Secure Digital card because it was based on personal testimony, which is not an acceptable source of information, and contradicts a cited reliable source. What you say may very well be true, but we need to have a proper published source to allow readers and editors to verify this information. Please read Wikipedia:Verification for why this is necessary. Let me know if you have any questions, and thank you for your attention. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 07:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of VNIIGAZ

A tag has been placed on VNIIGAZ requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Beach drifter (talk) 21:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from pages that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Beach drifter (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Horstmann technique

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Horstmann technique, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 19:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I am still unable to find independent sources establishing the notability of this technique beyond "this clinic exists and they sell classes". Would you be willing to share some of your sources? I have access to a full academic library, but only read English. Online translators work well enough for this purpose, or I could even scan and OCR a foreign language text or paper given physical access. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 01:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to setup the scanner. Electron9 (talk) 09:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a reference to where the technique is covered should be fine, thank you. Something like the Gale Encyclopedia of Alternative Medicine would suffice to establish notability. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 07:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I have nominated it for deletion here. Please discuss your points there. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 16:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

you can look at link removals

You can see the pages that got links removed at the IP constributions list --Enric Naval (talk) 00:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Damn, I hadn't noticed that the IP was adding stuff instead of removing it [4]. Sorry for the mistake. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Shit happens :), guess you mistook another IP for the offending IP. And thus in essence removing stuff you didn't intend. Electron9 (talk) 23:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

TerBeschikkingStelling on the TBS disambiguation page

Hi, Electron9. The manual of style for disambiguation pages specifies that:

• Red links should only be included on a dab page if the red link already exists as a link on another article. So, "Terbeschikkingstelling" is a valid entry given that the articles Murder and Pieter Baan Center contain the redlink. "TerBeschikkingStelling" has no other articles that link to it.

• Entries on dab pages should have one navigable (blue) link each.

• The blue link should take the reader to an article that provides the reader with additional info. So, would netherlands, punishment or psychiatric hospital be informative to the reader about TerBeschikkingStelling? None of the three mention the topic. Perhaps it could be reworked to include Murder or Pieter Baan Center? Just a thought.

• External links should not be included as entries or in descriptions as dab pages. So, the link and citation should not be used on a dab page, but would be great on a stub article for the term.

So, given these conditions (and without seeing, at least at first glance, a compelling reason to invoke ignore all rules in this case) I removed the entry. Hopefully, that explains it better. I would be happy to help try and help you rework the entry. --Gwguffey (talk) 02:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

(follow up) I did some rework to the entry to better conform to the MOS. Take a look. --Gwguffey (talk) 02:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks much better. Now anyone that wish to know what the heck TBS is about can at least get pointed in the right direction. A page of it's own, or a new section in an existing may be something to do later when more material show up. Electron9 (talk) 08:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Drop me a line if you need anything further. Happy editing. --Gwguffey (talk) 13:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

request for input on AT Attachment article name

Greetings, do you have any suggestions on the question of renaming the "AT Attachment" article back to that name? Discussion is here. You might also have some comments for user Ramu50 on that page. Thanks! Jeh (talk) 03:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Static_random_access_memory#Bus_behaviour

In this article, there's a sentence I don't understand.

Rise and fall time also affect (~5ns).

Is that only because I don't know electronics much? I wonder if you could clarify that sentence.

Thanks for your time – b_jonas 13:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Unclear formulation, I have reformulated it. In essence it can affect the overall timing budget by about 5 ns. Ofcourse this also somewhat depend on what technology is used. But it's a ballpark figure. Electron9 (talk) 22:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. – b_jonas 16:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Minimig 2890.jpg

Hi. Some info seem o be missing from an image (Minimig 2890.jpg) you uploaded. Just thought you might want to know. /Lokal_Profil 20:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

SD card

You reverted an edit of mine deleting a large section of text on embedded systems and openness. Could you fix 'In April 2006, the SDA released a detailed specification for the non-security related portions of the SD Memory Card standard.' - which is apparantly incorrect - if it does not include high speed. Thanks. --Speedevil (talk) 20:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

René Duchez

The sole reference on this page doesn't inspire confidence. Can you provide something better -- and assure me that it isn't just a hoax? Richard Pinch (talk) 18:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I saw it on either Discovery, National Geographics, or History channel. In a program about WWII. Don't remember the program name. But it was sent the same day as I wrote the article asfair. Electron9 (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Richard Pinch (talk) 06:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)