User talk:Cacycle/Archive 08

User:Lupin/autoedit.js
Hi, your recent edits to this broke it as  is undefined. Could you please fix it. (This may only be a problem because I am using the script on other wikis included from here as instructed by mw:Extension:Autoedit). Conrad.Irwin (on wikt) 19:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I did not notice your message. I have fixed it. Cacycle (talk) 21:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Conrad.Irwin (on wikt) 00:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Fluorocarbon
Your wisdom has helped before. Could you weigh in on the fluorocarbon page? My reliance on a secondary source definition (only one being applied to the page) has prompted lots of discussion (and calls for defining based upon IUPAC), which I find instructive, but narrow and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Also I am running into problems with another editor as it looks like a near edit war? Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair update: I just created an organofluorine page which may diffuse tensions. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 20:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Inflamed - the page was deleted with a redirect to organofluorine chemistry - can you provide oversight for this activity as I think is most likely crossing behavior guidelines. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Cacyle, I am concerned about this rhetoric against me combined with this. This seems to be getting heated up as my talk page has been littered with what I call negative political attack ads, (some insinuating I could be removed from Wikipedia). I don't stand up for every edit I have made, but I have made some bold edits lately to combat what I interpret as anti-Wikipedian action against me because I am perceived as a threat. Perhaps you can take a look. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 23:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

What usually helps if you are in emotional editing disputes is to get some time off, either by doing some real-world stuff or by contributing to other regions of Wikipedia. Do never take content disputes personally, and, as trivial as it it sounds, never forget that almost all contributors (and definitely all Wikipedians you have been in contact with so far) are trying to work in the best interests of our collaborative project. (Re-)reading Assume good faith also can help to cool one down.

In every profession there is standard language, informal language, and dialects and over time you get a pretty good feeling to creatively switch between them and to identify and interpret them. This distinction might get lost in written texts. As important as sources and references on Wikipedia are, it can be tempting to cherry-pick them or to interpret them too literally or too narrow. I think you should make more use of the huge amount of combined (implicit) knowledge of the old guys in our chemistry department... Cacycle (talk) 00:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and thanks for your comment on the fluorocarbon talk page. I guess I was sticking to the broader fluorocarbon definition to the point of a fault, without communicating all of my ideas. I admit this, but I also admit I did it because I interpreted that some of the more established editors were simply trying to circumvent any contributions or ideas I brought to the table illogically. I basically agreed with your post on the talk page and have since made some edits. I hope everything works out smoothly from here. Thanks again. -Shootbamboo (talk) 00:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Placebo
I have replied to your comments and accusations on the placebo page. Thanks, Verbal   chat  20:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Aphrodisiac
Hello, I was reviewing the history of this article and noticed that you cleaned it up quite considerably. Thank you for that. Kindly be aware that in accordance with your edits I've reverted User:Denis tarasov's reinstatement of material you'd cleaned up. Thanks again, 144.74.60.104 (talk) 20:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Aphrodisiacs
Why you removed garden beet, ragweed, hawthorn and all the section "Traditional medicine", if it's clearly stated in the these articles that it's aphrodisiac, but left the other unreferenced "food" like the Strawberries, chocolate, turtle eggs etc.? I think it's better to leave my changes.


 * These entries are highly suspicious and for the two latter ones, aphrodisiac use is not even mentioned in the articles. As my edit summary stated, I have removed all unreferenced and dubious entries. Feel free to add them back with reliable references (please no online cookbooks...). Cacycle (talk) 13:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

me
you basically called me out (or at the very least heavily implied) as an experienced editor. WRONG. is it so hard to believe that i practiced with sandboxes before i started editing? because i paid attention to detail and i didn't want to make mistakes? o no! that would be impossible! you guys do a hell of a job welcoming new editors. get a grip and stop being so secretive with new editors. i should have been discussed to about this instead of marginalized as if something was wrong with me! (harassed by Smokefoot then left alone with some good input from Leyo summed up the beginning of my Wikipedia experience). perhaps I wanted to use one page for others to recognize the quality of work I could contribute! no wonder I just got into gigantic squabbles with so many people! this is wikipedia's welcome? no wonder there aren't more editors! (sorry I had to vent). I like you by the way, I just think you unfairly contributed to creating a culture that gave me hell (instead of assuming good faith). I know I know you had reasons to believe what you did, but, perhaps we should rewrite a bit of a Wikipedia policy article from this who knows. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 06:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * and, if you think my edits have the possibility of influencing a court case, then I'm flattered by you highlighting the quality of my edits. also, i think Wikipedia would be flattered by her importance in this regard. your conjecture would also require a fairly malleable court system though. i recommend you check out the legal document i cite, they appear pretty judicious about the facts they cite. but, following the logic of your implication, (which is wrong, i am not part of a professional attempt, and I hope you don't inspire a delusion of grandeur for me, btw) if did cite a relevant fact that influenced a court case then theoretically speaking wouldn't that be a good thing? But here I am, again, on the defensive, because of speculative rabble-rousing. let me repeat, again, that i like you (because i think you did things in good faith) but i think you just fell victim to the rabble-rousing of a particular editor. i suspect my final sentence "Despite evidence PFOA has biological effects in humans (that are likely harmful to human health), DuPont's position is that the data does not prove PFOA causes health effects[54]" (and my edit history regarding that sentence) is undergoing intense scrutiny by admins at this point... who knows... perhaps a delusion of grandeur (DOG). (but I do logically surmise it is being discussed fervently in admin world because this is good s***). i was disappointed that no-one even attempted to edit that sentence, so I went back and edited it myself!!! i guess everyone was just watching me to see what i did. (which is the main problem, i wage, after all [also hardly no-one stepped up to my defense in the face of what i would label as harassment by the same rabble-rousing editor {thanks for stepping to my defense that one time though}]). and by the way, thanks for defusing the situation on the fluorocarbon talk page with your wise edit. -Shootbamboo (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Have you checked the dates of those old edits? There is no reason to become paranoid or to feel too defensive. This is how Wikipedia works, we simply care a lot about the project and try to keep it objective and unbiased. Your editing style was very conspicuous and did not follow Wikipedia etiquette. Consider that undiscussed and high-pace edits can easily alienate your fellow editors - this is a consensus-driven collaborative project and consensus often needs time and discussions. Do not take anything personal, but try to adjust to the Wikipedia rules. Please also reread and consider my advice above. Cacycle (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. So is it your opinion I have no legitimate gripes about the interactions (or lack thereof) I received from other Wikipedia editors while they talked about me? -Shootbamboo (talk) 18:50, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all the policy links. Please pardon me if I sound like I am personally attacking you. I merely intend to discuss the treatment I received in whole by the Wikipedia community. (And ways it seems like it could have been more welcoming to me). Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 18:59, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I read the Wikipedia etiquette section, and I don't understand how my edits (pre October 12th) were outside of this policy. I am basically trying to make sense of my Wikipedia experience thus far. I initiated a similar (albeit totally different exchange to this end on Edgar181's talk page.) -Shootbamboo (talk) 19:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * IMHO, if I am remembering correctly, your silence appears against wikipedia policy. I am dissapointed and I can't help but feel slightly offended if that is the case. it appears your are implying (with your silence) that I should reread the good faith piece. But I asked you additional questions. I am sorry, I love Wikipedia polices, but I find it impolite for you to not address my questions. IMHO, I think you owe me an apology, if for nothing else, for not replying to my concerns in a timely manner. You might be upset by my boldness here, but I can not help but be bold, so please forgive me. -Shootbamboo (talk) 19:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * My silence reflects more my feeling that everything that had to be said has been said and that you can figure out the rest yourself (beside me being busy in real life). The focus on Wikipedia is on collaborating on encyclopedic content and we judge you only by your contributions. This is not a discussion forum and neither do I care too much about you on a personal level nor should you take any criticism personally. Focus on content, respect your fellow editors, and adapt to Wikipedia rules. 'Nuff said :-) Cacycle (talk) 20:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. =) -Shootbamboo (talk) 20:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Vitamin C and Urushiol
Thanks for that. I was a whisker away from rolling it back myself, but didn't want to start a 2-player edit war. The added content was well referenced in its details, but all those refs were poor quality self-published stuff and just not up to scratch. I imagine they'll re-appear though. Shame really, I'd love a solution to lacquer sensitivity (I'm a woodworker with an interest in Japanese work) that was as simple as Vitamin C. 8-) Andy Dingley (talk) 14:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Embed 'Date delinking' and 'Add metric units' options within WikiEdit
Thanks for your comments at the village pump and I have a further question there.

On a slightly different matter, would you like to embed the functions of my script into WikiEdit? The user options in my script are: Incidentally, I believe that my script doesn't work correctly with WikiEdit. I would be happy to discuss this in detail. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 12:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Add metric units
 * Delink dates to dmy
 * Delink dates to mdy
 * All dates to dmy (i.e. even if not linked)
 * Add dates to mdy
 * Delink common terms (mostly geographical entities like 'England')


 * Please check User:Cacycle/wikEd for how to make your script compatible with wikEd. You could make it into a plugin for wikEd, check User:Cacycle/wikEd customization. wikEd already has some functionality resembling your script (the purple buttons) and you could check the wikEd code (these routines start with "WikEdFix...". Please discuss further wikEd stuff at User_talk:Cacycle/wikEd. I would be glad to add some of your ideas to wikEd if the code is not too long (no long name lists...). Cacycle (talk) 14:04, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. My code is at User:Lightmouse/monobook.js/script.js. I took a look at the compatibility thing. Can I just check that your phrase "before making their changes and then copying the content back to the iframe" means that I put your first 'if' statement at the beginning of my code and your second 'if' statement at the end?

I will investigate creating a plugin and will use User_talk:Cacycle/wikEd. Lightmouse (talk) 14:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Pentobarbital
Hi Cacycle, what do you mean by saying this SVG is ? Regards, --NEUROtiker (talk) 09:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, that was a mistake and I have reverted it. I did this for images like Image:Pentobarbital 2d.svg. Cacycle (talk) 17:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Blog on WikEd
Hi CaCycle, I'm not sure if you saw this blog entry, thought you might like to hear that your work is appreciated! WalkermaT (talk) 04:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that link :-) Cacycle (talk) 04:38, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Low quality chemicals
Hey! I'm Harbin from Commons. I uploaded a new version of File:DMT.svg. Does it conform to Wikipedia standards now? --Harbinary (talk) 21:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that looks good :-) If you want you could further rotate the molecule counterclockwise to orient the pyrrole so that the N and H labels are vertically aligned downwards and the sidechain is exactly horizontal, similiar to this structure: DMT.png. Cacycle (talk) 04:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks on NaF
I should have done what you did, but the article has been a magnet for mischief and I responded mechanically. Thanks.--Smokefoot (talk) 16:57, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Laurel wreath.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Laurel wreath.png, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 04:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Changing contributions to the MSG article
Hello,

A week or so ago I added a vital, missing line to the MSG article. I rarely post anything anywhere, but this is an extremely important subject that is important to peoples' wellbeing, as I've run into several individuals who didn't know about this and had been literally suffering from migraine headaches for many years without even considering MSG. I have been checking back to make sure I did everything correctly (in case someone were to rephrase or send me a message or something), but instead of things being intact or a note letting me know that I should do things differently, I instead saw my line simply removed. I do write professional technical documentation so I don't think my organization or grammar was too far off. If you want for me to rephrase my statement, please let me know. However, this information belongs in this article and must be provided there in one form or another. Please contact me in the future before making changes.

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous081222 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * We have a whole article about that health scare rumor and there is a prominent link right above your additions (see Glutamic_acid_(flavor)). Please refrain from adding personal opinions or hearsay without adequate reliable references, see Reliable sources. Thanks, Cacycle (talk) 08:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I have modified the sentence to use the term "claim", so it is a fact that some individuals claim to experience migraine headaches after consuming MSG. It is actually a fact that we do, not just a claim, but I am certainly willing to compromise and use the term "claim" for the sake of compromise. That said, feel free to suggest rephrasing or anything you would like, but the information belongs there in one way or another. Yes, my motive is obviously warning people, but I am doing nothing incorrect in stating a fact. If there is some process for adding a refernce to this fact, please by all means suggest how that is done, but one way or another, it is a fact that "some people claim to experience migraine headaches after consuming MSG".

Thank you for pointing out that link. However, the link (which, by the way, I did not even take note of as being in any way related to migraines when I first read the article) references an article that appears to take a position that MSG does not cause a reaction (not neutral and absolutely incorrect, but at least it mentions it, sort of). The "potential connection" between MSG and migraines is so well-known (by those that have investigated the matter in depth or experience it first-hand) that placing a single sentence in this article is absolutely appropriate.

Thanks, Anonymous081222 (talk) 09:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we cannot accept not or unreliably referenced dubious information. In this case reliable information could be a scientific study. Please familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia rules (good starting points would be WP:NOT and Reliable sources. Cacycle (talk) 16:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

The information is perfectly reliable. Some other folks have apparently given me some help and added references. The "some people claim" information you are disputing is all over the internet. You seem to know something about editting wikipedia - perhaps you should have given me a hand rather than arguing with me. The fact you choose to argue rather than help out really makes me (and probably others) wonder why and weakens your own argument significantly. ps This note was really added more for anyone who may read your page here and wonder how this issue was resolved - for you folks, please go see the MSG talk page and you'll see the debate is clearly in our favor. Especially see how these guys made citations to argue with another guy that actually prove my original "some people claim" point. VERY odd. Anonymous081222 (talk) 02:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Pareto's principle
Heya Cac

Such is our fate that the wikichemists spend a disproportionate amount of time arguing about toxicity and conspiracies with public health "advocates" than with articles. I'm sure it's under control, but wanted to drop by say hi. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 03:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If you talk about Monosodium_glutamate I do not think it is under control. Please see Talk:Monosodium_glutamate where more independent opinions would be welcome. Cacycle (talk) 16:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

LSD
Can you give me a page number where I can find the reference to LSD being bitter. I have searched front and back of Tihkal, and cant find it. The autobiography is hard search. Its not that I do not believe you, it is just all the anecdotal evidence to the contrary. I know this is a silly topic, but it is a raging debate, and if it is bitter I would like to be able to cite my references on demand in discussion. Thanks a bunch. If you reply here I will see it, my IP changes so I do not have a talk page 72.66.243.220 (talk) 17:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I do not have my copies accessible and it could also be in PiHKAL. It is a story in the first part of the book. If I recall it correctly, a friend of them accidentally ingested a large overdose of LSD in the assumption that it was something else. Hope that helps, Cacycle (talk) 18:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Lightmouse date scripts

 * I see you operate date script written by Lightmouse> A discussion at Lightmouse's house may be of interest to you. Ohconfucius (talk) 09:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to Science Debate Forum
Hello,

I am electricRush and I would like to invite you to join the Science Debate Forum. It is open to anyone who has an interest in science, and is completely free. We have a welcoming community and discussion forums in all subjects ranging from cosmology to physics to politics. In general it is a great discussion board that fits all scientific interests.

Thanks, - electricRush (  T   C  )Sign! 05:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Frankincense -- Mosquitos
Hi Cacycle!

I did find these three PubMed abstracts regarding frankincense essential oil (which would be present in incense smoke) being extremely effective in killing mosquito larvae (50ppm frankincense oil is 100% effective after 24h). At least one source says that the essential oil affects all stages of mosquito development including the adult phase. Not so much on repelling them, yet, but pretty interesting, never the less. Nice to see that something besides DDT works.

It's likely that components in the frankincense essential oil are known insect repellents (like most essential oils), but I still have to find betters sources.

As you may already know, per a recent scientific study review, the results of 1/3 of all medical studies turn out to be false in the long run. Perhaps experimenter bias and corporate greed may play a role. Any time there are billions of dollars at stake, there is too much motivation for greedy people to make a bunch of bogus studies. One example I remember was of a pharmaceutical company that did 5 studies of their own product. Four studies came out unfavorable and one came out favorable for their product, so they threw out the 4 negative ones and kept the one positive one! Unfortunately, even scientific studies we need to take with a grain of salt.

Thanks for all of your great work on Wikipedia!!! Have a great day!

WriterHound (talk) 18:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Location hack advice
G'day. Not really WikEd related, but I notice you use the location hack to retrieve globals so I thought you might have some advice for me. I'm playing around with manipulating the watchlist using Greasemonkey, and I'd like to retrieve the wgUserName value. Try as I might, I can't seem to get the variable's value returned from the following function: // grab globals from Mediawiki // (http://wiki.greasespot.net/Location_hack) window.bnwGetGlobalElement = null; window.bnwGetGlobal = function( name ) { if( bnwGetGlobalElement == null ) { bnwGetGlobalElement = document.createElement("textarea"); bnwGetGlobalElement.id = "bnwGetGlobalElement"; bnwGetGlobalElement.style.visibility = "hidden"; bnwGetGlobalElement.style.display = "none"; document.body.appendChild(bnwGetGlobalElement); } location.href = "javascript:void(typeof("+ name + ")!=\"undefined\"?document.getElementById(\"bnwGetGlobalElement\").value=" + name + ":null)"; return( bnwGetGlobalElement.value); }

var bnwUserName = bnwGetGlobal( "wgUserName" );

bnwUserName is always empty. I even tried using the version from WikEd, without success. I understand there may be some trouble with Firefox 3. Any clues? Cheers, Basie (talk) 06:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe you cannot access textarea values when the object is hidden. Have you tried div with innerHTML? Cacycle (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, the wgUserName variable is set in a page javascript and it will not be available before the load event has been fired. You have to hook your routine to the load event, e.g. by using  Cacycle (talk) 14:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Great! Thanks for the ideas, I'll give those a try. Cheers, Basie (talk) 23:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Lupin and IE
I think I may have discovered why users with Internet Explorer are having issues with their edit summaries. The better fix would be to get a proper browser, but either way, it appears that IE has trouble converting %5b to [. I was wondering if it is possible to change the occurrences of %5b in the code to [ for those users who insist on using Internet Explorer. -- Terrillja talk  19:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed, please could you confirm that it now works in Firefox as well as MS IE (clear your browser cache with Shift-Reload). Thanks, Cacycle (talk) 20:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Working now (had to ask someone else to test it). Thank you! -- Terrillja talk  21:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Molecular geometry
I do not find your reversion of my well-meaning efforts to stop the persistent vandalism of this article by adding back the actual angles. We can not protect this article for ever. Have you looked to see how many time IP editors have replaced the ideal angles with the actual angles? I am going to revert it and I suggest you discuss it on the talk page where I have already explained my edit. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  20:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see my reply on Talk:Molecular_geometry. Cacycle (talk) 23:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, I want to ask a question to you. We want to add your useful software "wikEd" to Turkish Wikipedia. What should we do? Thanks from now. :) --♪♫ Berkay 0652 11:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Berkay0652,


 * Please see User:Cacycle/wikEd international for how to create a translation. Once you have cretaed the translaion I will add its web address to the wikEd program. Please then see Gadget for how to install a gadget and see MediaWiki:Gadget-wikEd and MediaWiki:Gadget-wikEd.js for how it is done for wikEd on the English Wikipedia.


 * Good luck, Cacycle (talk) 13:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

"importScript is not available on all wikis"
Aah, I wasn't aware of that. Considering it's in wikibits.js, it *should* be available on all Wikimedia wikis, shouldn't it? Perhaps you could change the installation instructions to "try importScript; if that doesn't work, do it this way"? Just a thought... ;) 「ダイノ ガイ 千 ？！」(Dinoguy1000) 21:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK :-) Cacycle (talk) 22:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Penicillin Core
There's now a .svg image format of the penicillin core ...if u could help replacing the png with the new .svg cause I can't find a link to edit the png page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Penicillin_Core.svg.

thanks

SchwarzeMelancholie (talk) 07:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC) There are several issues with this image and I kindly ask you not to use it in articles in its current form. Atom symbols are misaligned, the bold wedges are not wedgy enough, the hashed bond is not wedged, the NH hydrogen is misoriented, the R is in a wrong font, and there is a misaligned yellow square under the R. Cacycle (talk) 07:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Great Job
Great job with the wikEd text editor. Its the best Gadget on Wikipedia. Well done! &mdash;  HK22   \ my contributions  /  (  my talk  ) 02:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks :-) Cacycle (talk) 04:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

File:A chemical structure.png
Hi Cacycle. What about moving or re-uploading it to a more specific name? ;-) --Leyo 00:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's part of the A/T/G/C series of chemical structures (A being the common abbreviation for adenosine). It is a funny name now that you pointed it out - but do you really think we have to re-upload it under a different name? Cacycle (talk) 23:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do indeed. :-) I think that would be easier than placing on the image page. --Leyo 14:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

File:FCKeditor corruption demo.png
Hi. You uploaded this image as PD-self, which is incorrect. Just because you have taken the screenshot, it does not mean that you have taken on the copyright for that screenshot. I have changed the license now. Thanks, &mdash; neuro  (talk)  09:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm just going down your uploads now, here's a few issues for you (which I will resolve if you don't):
 * File:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle 800x600 correct.png - Wikipedia logo is not free.
 * File:2008 main page redesign study Cacycle.png - Not PD.
 * File:Wikipedia new favicon on address bar.png - The favicon is not PD.
 * File:Wikipedia new favicon on browser tab.png - The favicon is not PD.
 * Please be more careful with your licenses in future. Thanks, &mdash; neuro  (talk)  09:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for checking and correcting the licenses. But please could you explain in more detail why you think the favicons should not be PD-self. They are completely self-made from scratch as a design study and do not contain any copyrighted material. Thanks, Cacycle (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The close button and the home icon? Cacycle (talk) 16:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just because you take a screenshot, it does not make it yours to relicense. The software is not public domain. &mdash; neuro  (talk)  18:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, right, the favicon. I didn't notice it was custom, removing and reinstating PD. &mdash; neuro  (talk)  18:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Afamelanotide
Hi there. Your recent changes on the afamelanotide page seem out of kilter with recent discussions there. Could you please join the talk page and explain why you made the changes, reversing them until discussed? Drug names have been an issued I have raised due to recent media confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljamesh (talk • contribs) 19:24, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Your revert on my talk page
Hi. Could you explain what you meant to do by this edit? Thanks,  Sandstein   06:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, I did not do this intentionally. Your user page is on my watchlist and the edit looks like an accidental and unnoticed click on the rollback link :-S Cacycle (talk) 04:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Sinicuichi
Hi! Just wanted to let you know that I'm working on the Heimia article. I noticed that you have contributed some important edits to that page, so I thought you might be interested. If you have any concerns with the changes I've made thus far, please let me know. StrawberryCube (talk) 05:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

expired
Hi Cacycle. I am not sure if are aware of the fact that the move to the categories “…/expired” happens automatically after the description page has not been edited for 30 days. In my opinion, this would be too much (useless) work to do that manually. --Leyo 08:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * After re-reading that discussion I was wondering if my proposal might introduce too much bureaucracy and work myself. Feel free to discuss that at Commons:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Maybe we could add a flag to the poor chemical structure template or create a new template to differentiate between images that can stay with the warning and those that should go. Cacycle (talk) 13:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think, the existing templates “Superseded” and “SupersededSVG” would serve for that purpose. BTW: You could still modify your suggestion (and at the same time adding the missing signature). :-) --Leyo 14:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Duloxetine chemical structure.png
Hi Cacycle. Please have a look at the dispute. Thanks. --Leyo 10:47, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see User_talk:Edgar181. Cacycle (talk) 12:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Cocaine paste
(Discussion moved to Talk:Cocaine_paste. Cacycle (talk) 01:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC))

Problems with Lupin's anti-vandal tools
Hi, I've left a note on the anti-vandal tool talk page. I hear you're good with this kind of thing, and was wondering if you could take a peek for me? Thanks! Deon555 (talk) 10:26, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Filter Recent Changes/Lupin
Thank you so much for fixing the roll back!—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  06:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:LSD blotter paper.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:LSD blotter paper.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

The text above is automatic; here is some more context:

The file contains images from the Disney film Dumbo, but it was moved to Commons anyway and (improperly) deleted here. Then they deleted it at Commons because of the copyright concerns. Now I've restored it here, but the copyright concerns remain, so it may be deleted again. So if you want to save it, then you should address those concerns.

Also, I assume that you uploaded it to link to it from some article; whatever article that was no longer links to it. Note that some copyrighted images can be used under fair use if the articles that use them are appropriate, so restoring its usage in an article may help keep it from being deleted. Be sure to give a good fair-use rationale in that case.

—Toby Bartels (talk) 11:39, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your efforts. I have no strong opinion on this and it really does not matter if it gets deleted, especially since it is no longer used in the LSD article. Cacycle (talk) 14:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Domoic acid
Cacycle,

You may be interested to see this controversy. Apparently C&E News were using your structure file, including the unspecified stereochemistry! Walkerma (talk) 18:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

ChemAxon
It actually does (again) exist...was at Chemaxon instead. I had moved it to proper capitalization thinking "just wrong name" before realizing the deletion history of this thing. I pinged the deletor to see if it should die again. DMacks (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. I have reverted my reversions for now :-) Cacycle (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
Not up on "fighting vandals" but I fixed this, and the history looks worthy of an inspection (& possible block?). Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 21:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk page archiving
Have you ever considered setting up a bot to archive the wikEd talk page? It is now way too long to easily navigate. If you wish, I could set it up for you. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 11:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That page is essentially a bugtracking system and only fixed bugs should be archived. There is probably no way to automate that. Cacycle (talk) 15:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Explorer error refers to your user name
My Windows internet explorer gives the folowing error message at wikipedia pages:

Message: Expected identifier, string or number

Line: 582

Char: 3

Code: 0

URI: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=User:Cacycle/wikEd.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript

This is the message I get if I click on the exclamation mark at bottom left of browser, along with "Done but with errors on page"

Can you explain this, or is this just one of those random windows things? Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 17:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Simply uncheck wikEd in your Wikipedia preferences under gadgets. I have fixed this in the upcoming release. Cacycle (talk) 03:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * noted, done, works fine now, thanks. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 21:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

WikEd
Thank you for the latest changes to the code of WikEd. It was great for improving readability of densely packed articles before, but now it's even better. Soap Talk/Contributions 15:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Testing with live gadgets.... ew
I notice MediaWiki:Gadget-wikEd.js, which is a live gadget, is simply importing User:Cacycle/wikEd.js. I also notice lots of recent sequential edits, most of which are fixes, as in giving the appearance of live testing of a live gadget. This is generally a bad idea. Gadgets should be stable versions with at least minimal testing (and usually a level of testing proportional to the complexity of the gadget). A very complex gadget like this which affects edits should probably get lots of testing before any changes.

And I am not sure if it is related, but what brought this up was this VPT thread. wikEd seems to be the only gadget with the string 'Ctrl-click'. --Splarka (rant) 08:14, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, this is a wikEd issue, I have reverted the program to the previous version until this is fixed (so far I cannot replicate the problem). Every uploaded version has been tested by me locally, the series of changes was labeled "fix" because they did not warrant a new version number and are not expected to affect article text. I am sorry for the problems that this has caused :-( Cacycle (talk) 13:16, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I use Google's Chrome
Hi

I use Google's Chrome. Sorry for the mess.

Cheers, Lamro (talk) 03:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Low quality SVG structures
Hi Cacycle. There are lots of SVG structures uploaded by User:Harbin and tagged by you in Commons:Category:Low quality chemical diagrams/expired. As they clog up this category, I would be happy to get them out there. However, there are just too many images for me to upload new versions to all. Harbin does not seem to be willing to do that himself. Could you help doing that or remove the dispute tags in some cases, where there are just minor problems? --Leyo 19:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you know which of them are still used somewhere and/or have no replacements? I can make structures for those. Cacycle (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I would have to check that on a case-by-case basis. --Leyo 20:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As you might have noticed, I have started to upload better versions (same file name). It would be nice if you could help, too. --Leyo 05:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

 Ron h jones (Talk) 19:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Atrane structures
Hi Cacycle. I don't suppose you could draw a nicer looking structure for phenylsilatrane? It should have a pentacoordinated silicon with a Si-N dative bond but I've been finding it hard to draw it in 2D to show how the 3D stucture looks without making some of the bonds all squashed up and wrong length looking. Help would be appreciated! Meodipt (talk) 11:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK Cacycle (talk) 18:53, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. This 2D structure resembles the 3D minimized conformation. I am almost positive that there should not be a coordinative bond netween Si and N. A quick Chem3D minimization indicates that the conformation with the electron pair pointing outwards is strongly favored. Do you have any references suggesting otherwise? Cacycle (talk) 22:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Just the original Russian reference linked off the page to the pdf (translated into English luckily!), and also see the reference on the atrane page. The Russian paper is quite old, but the title refers specifically to pentacoordinated silicon derivatives and in the text the evidence for a Si-N bond etc is discussed in detail on p43-44. My interest was more in the pharmacology of the compound as anything which is a convulsant twice as potent as strychnine must be a potent and selective ligand for some receptor target (probably the glycine receptor, or GABAa perhaps) but there seems to be little research or information available about these compounds, in English anyway. Meodipt (talk) 22:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Something like this is more like what the references suggest



but as I said I'm just not that happy with the drawing, it looks all distorted and my molecule editor doesn't do dative bonds so I had to draw the arrow manually in paint...hence why I was hoping you could do a nicer interpretation. Meodipt (talk) 00:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, working on it... Cacycle (talk) 00:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Still working on it... Cacycle (talk) 03:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

LeftEditLinks customization
Hi Cacycle-

I can't get the configuration for LeftEditLinks to work... setting the variables in my monobook.js doesn't seem to work, regardless of whether the script is installed directly or as a gadget. Any idea what's wrong? –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 01:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed :-) Cacycle (talk) 03:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello again! User:TheDJ told me yesterday that the script moves the section 0 edit link if that script is also enabled, but that this looks really ugly. Since you redesigned all of the code and I now have no idea how to safely modify, I was wondering if you could take a look? Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, and the request (with an idea for how to fix it) is here. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It should work now but does not - it probably depends on which gadget is scheduled to run first. Will check into it. Cacycle (talk) 21:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Apology
Sorry about my behavior over the gadget, I'll try to check myself better in the future (I left a fuller message at WT:TW/BUGS, BTW). =) 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 18:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Help with probable vandalism
222.67.213.194 is splashing pesky edits on several pages related to pharma products/oral hygeine/surfactants. I deleted some edits a couple of days ago, but was overwhelmed. Both as I recall are from Shanghai. That surge came from 222.67.202.31. Glycerol and mouthwash are illustrative. An administrator needs to review these actions and you seem to know about this area. Or pass this request on to someone. --Smokefoot (talk) 02:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm busy... Try Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and make clear what your problems with the edits are. When you revert give a good reason, try to contact the user and ask him to register a user name for user page discussion. Cacycle (talk) 13:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Compatibility with new Toolbar
The toolbar developed by the Wikipedia Usability Initiative (of which I am a developer) seems to have some issues with being compatible with wikEd at this point. I want to solve these issues, so please get in touch with me. Bug #19776 is the first bug reported thus far which identifies these issues, but others will likely crop up. Could you perhaps allow me to CC you on these bugs? --Trevor Parscal (talk) 23:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have responded on the bugzilla page. I'd love to help with fixing this strange error or adjusting wikEd. Feel free to CC me. We can discuss things here and on the wikEd discussion page. You could also use the E-mail this user function. Cacycle (talk) 02:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Chemical structure diagrams
Just to let you know, the instructions you followed are very outdated and I have corrected it. Keep in mind that you can't have both GFDL license and PD license on the same image. OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)