User talk:DASL51984/Archive 1

Unblock request
You can edit your talk page and make unblock requests here if you so choose. I'd expect a CheckUser will want to take a look at your block before a decision on whether or not you should be unblocked is reached. Huon (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Your attention needed at WP:CHU
Hello. A renamer or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. —cyberpower  Chat:Online 22:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

FYI
I'm glad to see that you've decided to stick around, but you should have asked me or one of the other SPI regulars to blank that page so that it doesn't show up here. As someone who has lived within an hour or so of oilfields my whole life, I appreciate your edits in that area, and the gifs on Commons are a great addition to the site. Keep up the good work! ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'll remember. DASL51984 17:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Removal of SPI archives
Please do not blank SPI archives as you did here. These are administrative archives and should not be touched except by clerks and administrators at SPI. I doubt that SPI would agree to blanking, but Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations would be the place to ask. SpinningSpark 12:16, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

February 2017
Hello DASL51984. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at M Sanjeeb Hossain. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. ''This also was definitely not a case of A1 or A3. It was not patent nonsense and provides enough context to identify the subject of the article. Please be careful with speedy deletion, as it can drive away new editors if used too hastily or broadly.'' Appable (talk | contributions) 21:18, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

db-nonsense
Hey,

Just wanted to let you know that db-nonsense does not apply to the userspace.

Thanks, TJH2018 talk  18:29, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate it if you didn't go forum-shopping, especially when someone removes a CSD template. Nothing in that userpage violates policy. TJH2018  talk  18:51, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Re:Doosan Fuel Cell America
Ordinarily, yes; however I try to shy away from that for two reasons. First, it usually creates problems for the article if the isp behind the username shows back up and restarts editing toward whatever end it had originally, which can lead to the block for the isp and protection for the article. The other reason is that the template issued has instructions for requesting a username change, which about 70% of those blocked opt for, so if they petition for a rename they end up unblocked, keep the their edits, and get moved to an acceptable name. If they can not edit from the isp address they usually opt for this approach. I'll revisit and adjust if nothing happens in 24 hours. Remember to that this is just how I do things, if you like or if you have a good reason to I am open to re-blocking with different settings. I'll be honest: blocking is not my strongest suite, so if I screwed up I more than happy to fix it if it needs to be fixed. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Reverting my edit
May I ask why you reverted my edit? That source is unreliable according to Identifying reliable sources and another user continues to add it back in. I have opened a discussion at the Administrator's Noticeboard to solve the issue, so I reverted their edit again until the discussion closes. (58.164.106.182 (talk) 02:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC))
 * Oops. Sorry about that. DASL51984 (talk | contribs) 02:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That's okay . (58.164.106.182 (talk) 02:22, 20 February 2017 (UTC))

Dear DASL

IP # 58.164.106.182 has reverted edits thrice in a 24 hour period. This may call for his account to be temporarily blocked. Please look into this. He or she appears very belligerent and disruptive.

I have been a Wikipedia editor for at least 10 years. I am a bit surprised about an anonymous editor with divergent IP numbers i.e. 58.164.106.182; 121.214.128.24; 121 214.96.118; 121.214.175.49; 121.214.120.94; 137.147.17.104 to give just a few examples had arbitrarily and rudely deleted items in the Puthandu or Tamil New Year Page. I suspect that this is an act of mischief - not sure why. It is an instance of edit warring, uncivility and perhaps even sockpuppetry.

Here is the background. There were three footnotes introduced by another editor. I am not sure who introduced the footnotes. This anonymous editor then proceeded to delete all three footnotes blaming me for introducing them (which is not correct). I instinctively reverted the deletions as I was not clear as to the reasons for the deletions.

After a to and fro of deletions and reversions, I looked at the three footnotes under question. I agreed with this anonymous editor that two citations (introduced by another editor) were in fact of poor quality. I therefore deferred to him/her and deleted the two footnotes. The third citation appeared rigorous and I retained it. This anonymous editor proceeded once again to delete it. Its a newspaper citation.

Please note that the main text is not under debate. Its a mere footnote that is being debated here. Should it be there or not? I seek your advice.

Meanwhile, please investigate this anonymous editor for destructive editing. Its not helpful. I also am not sure what the motive is. Does it border on vandalism?

I am genuinely puzzled by all this and seek your advice. I will be traveling and there will be a delay in response on my part.

Warm regards

Dipendra2007 (talk) 02:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Are you actually aware of what the issue is? I did not engage in an edit war, did you read my message above your one? Please stop the witch hunt against me. (58.164.106.182 (talk) 03:17, 20 February 2017 (UTC))

Reverting some of your edits
Hi DASL51984

Thank you for most of your edits on hyperbolic geometry but I have reverted some of them

The problem is you use "parallel", the term "parallel lines" just has a different (and not always very clear)  meaning in hyperbolic geometry and so some lines can be parallel. horo parallel or ultra parallel

In your: "In hyperbolic geometry, no two lines can be exactly parallel. "exactly parallel" needs explanation

The old " In hyperbolic geometry, there is no line that remains equidistant from another line. Instead, the points that have all the same orthogonal distance from a given line are on a curve called a hypercycle. "

Is I think beter (it doesn't mention parallel at all )

Your "In hyperbolic geometry, there are no parallel lines, since there is no line that remains equidistant from another. Instead, the points that all have the same orthogonal distance from a given line are on a curve called a hypercycle."

I revert as wel (again the mention of parallel lines )

I do appreciate your other changes WillemienH (talk) 17:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

October 2017
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page List of Mayday episodes has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. ''Several of your edits (most recently this one) have changed many paragraphs, without mention in the edit summaries. As previously discussed at Special:Permalink/807007474 and Special:Permalink/807085992, the edits themselves are often poorly written and introduce unintended changes to the meaning of the summaries. Please edit within your competence. '' Burninthruthesky (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Überlingen mid-air collision
Why did you move this article? Where did you discuss the move? --John (talk) 19:53, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Adding BPMs to articles
Hi. Please source these. I have reverted your edits to My Only Wish (This Year) where you added an oddly specific tempo for something that isn't sourced. Also, a source stating the song is teen pop does not contradict the general genres given prior—a song can still be teen pop while being broadly pop and Christmas-themed. They're not mutually exclusive. Thanks.  Ss  112   21:37, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If you can't cite it, leave it out. The article is a GA and I don't think the editor who got it promoted is going to like having unsourced claims on it.  Ss  112   02:42, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2000 Australia Beechcraft King Air crash, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ghost plane ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/2000_Australia_Beechcraft_King_Air_crash check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/2000_Australia_Beechcraft_King_Air_crash?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to EgyptAir Flight 990. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.  General Ization Talk  03:36, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Page move
Don't move pages without consensus. There's only been one FIU bridge collapse, I'm glad to say, so there's no reason to disambiguate it in the title with a year. I've moved it back, where it belongs. This seems to be a problem for you, don't move pages without discussing first.  Acroterion   (talk)   01:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Please stop moving pages to overly precise names. This is a violation of WP:PRECISE, and you have performed over 25 moves of this sort, so I suggest that you slow down and consider whether your move could be unnecessary. Even if these titles are ambiguous, in Wikipedia we disambiguate incidents by the month, not by the type of craft involved. epicgenius (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Tearwave.wav
Thanks for uploading File:Tearwave.wav. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 22:46, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:440 Hertz Sine Square Saw.wav
Thanks for uploading File:440 Hertz Sine Square Saw.wav. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 22:46, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Birgenair Flight 301 edits
Hi there, thank you for your recent edits to Birgenair Flight 301 but I'm afraid I had to revert them for the following reasons: I do agree with your other change ("None of the pitot tubes was recovered" > "None of the pitot tubes were ever recovered") so I've restored that for you in a separate edit. Kind regards, Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Investigators could not be 100% certain of the wasps nest theory and, as this was never determined beyond doubt, it's safest to err on the side of caution and say "investigators believe".
 * We no longer use (all) after the Fatalities value if Survivors=0, as it is redundant (see template) – this was discussed recently and consensus reached on 28 April.

File:Tearwave.wav needs authorship information
Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Tearwave.wav appears to be missing information as to one (or more) of the following :
 * 1) The author or creators of the work, (including information as to the author's lifespan).
 * 2) Where and how this particular version was obtained.
 * 3) When the work was created,

If you did provide such information, it is currently confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).


 * If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: will produce an appropriate expansion, or use the own template.

Please also add authorship and sourcing to other files you created or uplopaded. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log].

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:56, 13 June 2018 (UTC) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:56, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

July 2018
Hello, I'm SummerPhDv2.0. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, Dancing in the Dark (Bruce Springsteen song), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history 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. Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Page moving
You keep moving and retitling articles without any discussion. This is not how things are done. Enigmamsg 19:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

File source problem with File:440 Hertz Sine Square Saw.wav
Thank you for uploading File:440 Hertz Sine Square Saw.wav. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:35, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

"Diuranium" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Diuranium and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 19 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza<b style="color:#b00">03</b> ( d c̄ ) 01:19, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

"Dimolybdenum" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Dimolybdenum and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 20 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:28, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: ivory; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)