User talk:129.6.190.21

June 2015
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Erdős–Bacon number, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Amaury (talk) 20:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Read his page history - HE removed embarrassing info from his own page.
 * Your comment is absurd. There is no evidence that Aames edited the page. And even if he did, that doesn't give you the right to violate Wikipedia policies about living people. The warning stands. Continue this behavior and you will be blocked from editing. Sundayclose (talk) 20:26, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Your comment is incredibly naive. Look at the posting history of 208.114.124.199.  It includes cleaning his page of this embarrassing piece of his employment history, commenting on cruise ships on which he's been cruise director, and posting that he married "his soul mate".  Are you for real that you are that blind?129.6.190.21 (talk) 17:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Most things on this guy's page are unreferenced. Why aren't you clearing these things out? Why was the BibleMan info allowable for a year when it was posted in the exact same format that I restored? 129.6.190.21 (talk) 15:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

December 2016
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Due_and_undue_weight

Gates' salary is publicly available, and well sourced, but so are salaries of nearly all public school faculty. Gates is not the highest, nor is he rare in that he teaches little. There are no articles discussing Gates' salary as significant in any way. Nor are there any that suggest his teaching commitment is significant. Such conclusions are your own.

When you accuse my reversion of your edits to be based on opinion alone, the reverse is true. You personally feel his compensation package, which was agreed to by him and his employer, are unfair or excessive, and you personally feel he teaches too little. Unless you can cite a source that suggests either of these things, there is no reason to include his salary and teaching commitments in the Wikipedia article. You provide no rationale for why his salary is significant, nor do I see you editing the pages of other professors with high salaries to include said information. Kenton M (talk) 01:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

hi
I recently did an article for Ernest Ambler but don't have his date of death. If you (or someone at NIST) is able to, would you mind please updating it with one? Thank you! DarjeelingTea (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Recent edit to Tonka
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Tonka, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Morphdog flames 19:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits to NIST
I haven't mentioned anywhere that NIST sets standards, I simply mentioned that it "prescribes" standards, as I'm well aware that NIST is a non-regulatory agency. Also, the other changes I included were to mention the joint institutes NIST has with Stanford, CU Boulder and UMD, and also added more research areas to the ones present now as I personally think the present list is not exhaustive. Another was to change the name of the current director. And for almost everything, I included the relevant source(s). Let me know which of these you consider as spam or vandalism. Be specific in the responses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.6.39.91 (talk) 18:26, 16 November 2017 (UTC) Also, I edited the intro to focus on the fact that NIST is just not a measurement standards laboratory, it is much more than that and it is better to refer it as a physical sciences laboratory with specialization in developing measurement standards. Check the intro here from DOC https://www.commerce.gov/doc/national-institute-standards-and-technology#5/37.546/-91.103(The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is one of the Nation’s oldest physical science laboratories. At NIST world class science connects to real-world applications.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.6.39.91 (talk) 18:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It certainly sounds like you have an agenda, and probably even a WP:Conflict of interest. Phrases like "At NIST world class science connects to real-world applications" have no place on an encyclopedia. Please take your specific issues with the page to the Talk page of that article for them to be addressed there. Also, please take the time to read the many links just placed on your Talk page to review Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, in particular the Manual of Style (MOS) and how to present information neutrally. Also, remember to sign your Talk page contributions with four tildes ( ~ ). JesseRafe (talk) 18:54, 16 November 2017 (UTC)