User talk:EMsmile/Archive 2

pls see - discussion about water and sanitation information in country articles
Before adding sections to the main country articles best to read over User talk:Mll mitch for an overview of the concerns raised. A few people have talked about this a think that WP:UNDUE may apply and have asked that any further additions of this nature be talked about first. -- Moxy (talk) 04:54, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I have read that. The information I added on the China article is not a copy & paste but using new data from WHO and UNICEF. Let's discuss it further here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries/Templates#Suggestion:_Add_infrastructure_to_the_template (I see you have put a note there so I will continue there). Could you get the people that you have talked to explain their WP:UNDUE concerns there as well? Thanks. EvMsmile (talk) 08:56, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup this Saturday
This is just a friendly reminder of the Brisbane meetup that is occurring this Saturday at the Queensland Art Gallery café, which you have expressed an interest in attending. Please check the meetup page as some of the details may have changed since you last looked. I look forward to seeing you there! Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:28, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

cleansing with water
I think that making the point that non Muslim nations in South Asia use water to wash after using the toilet is a good point. Do you have any information on the nations other than India and Pakistan? I've spent a long time in Asia (but not South Asia) and it seems very common in a lot of nations, irrespective of wealth and/or westernization. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 06:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. Yes, it is very common and it annoys me that Wikipedia articles are often written as if our "Western" toilet system and habits (flush toilet; sitting; toilet paper; no water) is the norm and the others are rare exceptions when in fact it is almost the other way around (dry toilets; squatting toilets; no toilet paper; water used for anal cleansing - very common at a global level!). I've been trying to change this perception in many of the sanitation-related articles... Have you seen our WikiProject Sanitation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sanitation Perhaps you find it interesting. About the other countries where anal washing with water is common, there are lots but literature on it is hard to come by, except perhaps Lonely Planet Travel Guides? I'd have to do more of a Google search to find reliable sources. The anal washing is often connected to squatting toilets and I've done some research about that and incorporated it here in the article on squat toilets: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squat_toilet#Cultural_preferences_by_region More work is required though! EvMsmile (talk) 01:18, 3 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I've spent a little time in the Philippines, where washing with water is the normal style, yet the toilets are western style not squat style. I've always been told that I should not use paper, as the water pressure/toilet design is not suited for flushing large wads of paper. This always made me wonder if. 1. They wash with water, not paper, so the toilets were not designed to be suitable for paper. Or 2. The toilets are not suitable for paper, so they have to use water. There might be situations in which water is used, not because of culture or hygiene but because of toilet/plumbing specifications.Spacecowboy420 (talk) 06:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)


 * And you also find situations where people do use paper but they don't flush it down but rather collect it in waste bins next to the toilet. That's another option. I think you find that also in parts of Asia (e.g. China). Lots of different options... EvMsmile (talk) 06:55, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


Doc James (talk · contribs · email) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Thanks for all you have done this year :-) Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot - I couldn't have done it without your support and mentoring, User:Doc James!! :-) (and I didn't realise so many special events/holidays/festivals coincided with Christmas!) EvMsmile (talk) 07:14, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

thanks! your encouragement was very welcome
The thing is, I'm stuck! I have twice submitted this content (menstrual management) and more, as a new page, and had it refused on the grounds that it is already/should be in "menstruation". I'm really delighted that you've recommended keeping my edits to "menstruation" for now. Thank you! Happy to create a new page, but how to get past the reviewers? I can't choose who reviews! ZanGran (talk) 14:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll put my reply on your talk page, I think it fits better there. :-) EvMsmile (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

hand washing
Pointing out to the discussion in. Hope to see you join in :) Anthere (talk)
 * Will do, thanks. This review work that you User:Anthere have been doing and organizing is really important work. EvMsmile (talk) 02:50, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

 * please help translate this message into the local language

Thanks again :) -- Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit war warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Schistosomiasis. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Please do read WP:MEDMOS btw. Jytdog (talk) 09:47, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Article pages are for discussing article content. User pages are for discussing user behavior.  So I will answer your questions about your behavior here.
 * You made a bold change; I reverted it. You restored. That restoration = edit warring.  If you don't agree with someone's rationale in their edit note when they revert you, the correct next step is to open a Talk page discussion. (See WP:BRD)   Simply restoring your edit is edit warring.  It is usually technically blockable only when you revert three times (that is the "three revert rule") but the first and second reverts are edit warring already.  They are, not talking.  Talking is what we do.
 * About removing the notice above. Per the WP:TPG you are free to remove it from your own page.  But it is is not a badge of shame; it is a notice to warn you that if you continue as you have been, you are heading for a block.  That's all it is. Jytdog (talk) 10:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * For me, an "edit war warning" is a pretty serious thing to have on one's talk page. In fact, I find it disheartening. But anyhow. Learnt something about Wikipedia again. Might remove it from my talk page at some stage in the future. EvMsmile (talk) 10:38, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is a very bad thing to you, then in the future if someone reverts you, don't restore your content but rather open a Talk page discussion. That way you will never get another one. Good luck! Jytdog (talk) 16:18, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If I remember right, I didn't restore it in exactly the same way anyhow, but in a modified way which I thought would work and alleviate your concerns. I will take your advice about not reverting but let me also give you advice to give out those "edit war notices" a bit more sparingly in future to people who are generally working really hard to help improve Wikipedia, as one can easily judge from their "track record" on Wikipedia (I noticed on your talk page that someone else recently voiced disappointment for getting an "edit war notice" from you for something very small, so it is not just me who gets upset by such things). Anyhow - upwards and onwards! Until we "meet" again over some other issue. :-) EvMsmile (talk) 00:49, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Fertilizer
My experience with the articles on fertilizers and related topics is that much advocacy is written into these articles from an aspirational perspective vs reporting facts. Many of these articles have claims of wonderment and green-ness that does not match the record, even if they do paint an idyllic picture. Also, these types of articles often tend to report anecdotal claims vs broad informational sources, i.e. books by scientists vs reportage by hippies. Good luck with these articles.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree with you. You're referring to the articles on organic fertilizer and biofertilizer? Are there others as well? There was also a lot of trouble with the article on biosolids (i.e. the other way around, it was put into a very negative light). Another one is the one on effective microorganisms - I've actually decided to give up on that one as there are too many wackos out there who keep editing that one in a very non-encyclopedic way... EvMsmile (talk) 10:45, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Just for fun (bathrooms around the world)
Have you seen this? "Life where I'm from" is a video project by a Canadian dad living in Japan, and one subject was Bathrooms where I'm from. It's meant for kids, but it's fun to watch. Several examples from India, for example. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 11:43, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hadn't seen it but have seen many photos of toilets around the world. When they say bathroom are they focussing on toilets or on the washing aspects? Anyhow, would it make sense to add a link to it from the bathroom article? EvMsmile (talk) 12:06, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Both toilets and washing facilities. I wasn't suggesting to add it to any article, as this sort of YouTube video is definitely not a WP:RS! I intended this note as a friendly collegiate gesture, and found it odd that it got erased from your talkpage before you had even seen it, so thanks for re-instating it. There's no reason why our work on Wikipedia shouldn't be personally uplifting and indeed sometimes amusing, as long as that doesn't get in the way of building the encyclopedia. I wish you a happy and productive day! Carbon Caryatid (talk) 15:37, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * oh i am sorry i removed that! Jytdog (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with you User:Carbon Caryatid and thanks, no problem, Jytdog. :-) It's nice to give it a personal and light-hearted touch! About the video, it could be uploaded to Creative Commons and then used to illustrate the bathroom article. But maybe not worth the hassle. EvMsmile (talk) 21:48, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Apology accepted, User:Jytdog. Glad you enjoyed it, User:EvMsmile. I wasn't planning to upload the video anywhere. Like I said, just for fun. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

January 2017
Hello, I'm KATMAKROFAN. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Toilet appears to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 15:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If you mean the banner promoting the offline version of the health content of Wikipedia then no, this is not "promotional". Please engage in the discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/App/Banner EvMsmile (talk) 15:35, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Sewage treatment
Thank you for catching the punctuation error in subject article; but, after waiting more than a year for a reference citation, we really need to delete this statement unless you can provide a reference citation. Thewellman (talk) 00:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you mean this sentence: "although the borders between decentralized and centralized can be variable. For this reason, the terms "semi-decentralized" and "semi-centralized" are also being used."? OK, fair enough. Give me another week or two, please. I've got an idea which reference to use for this, just need to do a quick Google search and will also e-mail some colleagues about it today. Shouldn't be hard. If I haven't added a reference within two weeks, then delete the sentence (and/or take it to the talk page of the article). Thanks. EvMsmile (talk) 12:45, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Have changed my mind and deleted the two sentences in question. It is too technical for this kind of general audience. But I aim to set up a new Wikipedia article specifically for "Decentralized wastewater treatment", also called DEWATS. EvMsmile (talk) 15:49, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Rude Moderator
I noticed that you recently had a problem wherein RHaworth treated you rather rudely by deleting a page you created with absolutely no warning. I also had a recent experience with him wherein he completely deleted my user page (which I created 10 years ago) with no warning. Although I've been editing Wikipedia here and there for many years, I really don't have much experience other then that, including with moderators. My questions are: 1. Is that pretty normal for moderators to just go around deleting things that aren't obviously vandalism? 2. Aren't there rules for how moderators are required treat other users respectfully (e.g. not arbitrarily destroying their hard work, when it's obviously not vandalism)? 3. Is there an effective method of filing a complaint that will ultimately change their behavior?

ThanksPwscottiv (talk) 07:58, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, User:Pwscottiv, yes, I wasn't happy. And I noticed that others had also been affected. But for now I am giving User:RHaworth the benefit of the doubt. Probably he/she means well but it not very diplomatic with his/her comments! I think though that one needs to remind moderators that friendliness is key for a good experience with Wikipedia editing. - I suspect there is a way of filing a complaint but it may not really be necessary so far (I've never filed such a complaint before). EvMsmile (talk) 13:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Urine into Reuse of excreta. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:39, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reminding me of this. I had forgotten to mention it. But for this particular case the situation was like this: The same text blocks of about 4 paragraphs appeared on both Wikipedia articles, i.e. on urine and on reuse of excreta. Another user had improved the text on the urine article so I copied those improvements across to the other article. Then I culled down content on the urine article because it didn't make sense to repeat the content twice to the same level of detail. EvMsmile (talk) 14:00, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

My input needed?
In a 60 second peek into Wikipedia a few days ago, I believe that I saw my name mentioned in one of your talk page posts but I didn't have time to either register the topic or reply. With slightly more time, I have tried to find it without success. My notifications show no record of having received a ping, so either I saw it whilst asleep (certainly possible!), or you deleted it, or I am useless at searching. However, if the mention is there, I would be happy to reply if you could point me in the right direction. If it was in my sleep, please do delete this whole thread to save me from further embarrassment ! Regards  Velella  Velella Talk 11:09, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, please and you weren't dreaming! I mentioned you here on the talk page of reclaimed water. Would very much value your opinion on that one, thanks a lot. EMsmile (talk) 11:34, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Questions about Outreach Dashboard and edit-a-thon
thanks for your reply, User:Bluerasberry. Yes, I would like to talk more with you about this, in particular how you advertise your events and how you evaluate them. E.g. we are thinking of doing also translation work but worry that this would not be captured in the Outreach Dashboard. What's the best way to communicate with each other, how about e-mail - Special:EmailUser/EvMsmile? EvMsmile (talk) 14:02, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I just emailed you. The outreach dashboard does track activities in all language Wikipedias and many other Wikimedia projects, so it might work. We can talk about other kinds of outreach by voice or video chat.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  14:55, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi User:Bluerasberry, thanks for your advice per video call the other day. I am so glad that the Outreach Dashboard records activities across all the different language Wikipedias. I have four more questions about the outreach dashboard if I may (this one). (1) I recently changed my Wikipedia user name from EvMsmile to EMsmile; in Outreach Dashboard it still shows my old user name - is that a problem? If yes, would it be easy to change it in Dasboard? (2) One of the participants asked me recently what the passcode is for? From their end they see **** where I see the passcode. I have never used the passcode for anything? (3) Where it says "Campaigns: Miscellanea" - is this something that I should change or worry about? . (4) Another observation: It counts "words added". I have told my participants to also look for ways to improve readability. This may involve shortening of sentences, i.e. words reduced. Does that get subtracted from Words added (even though it is a good thing)? I suppose it would still increase the figure for "edits". EMsmile (talk) 11:13, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have some answers.
 * Yes, if you change your Wikipedia name the dashboard will not know. Re-register with your new user name. I see the name in the dashboard is your new name so you must have figured this out.
 * The event manager can set a password. I think that it might even be a default. If this is the case, you have to give the password out. To make things easier, it is possible to give people a link where they click through without needed the password.
 * Campaigns matter when you have multiple events. Imagine that you do three events or programs, and that you wish to combine all the numbers in the report. If you make a campaign, and put all three events in the campaign, then you get a sum of the results. This really matters with pageviews, because whereas other numbers in an event stop at the event's end, the audience count continues to rise.
 * Right - the scorecard is for words added, and not "net change". The team is still thinking about how to report something meaningful, but right now, "words added" is where we are. Another problem - this counts all the words in a citation, so especially in the sciences, this can be misleading.
 * I talked with you also about how to get a traffic report for all the articles in WikiProject Sanitation. I have an answer here - User_talk:MusikAnimal/Archive_36. I would be the one to write documentation on this, and so far, I have not yet written the instructions. I also would be the one to write instructions for some of these dashboard issues, and I can tell you - there is nothing more that you can read on these matters because I have not written it yet. Sorry for the delay in answering but this is where we are now, and even if I might be late or need a push sometimes I still want to try to help. Thanks for messaging.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  21:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks, User:Bluerasberry! now I understand that thing with the passcode. The good news is that the traffic report for all the articles in WikiProject Sanitation has already been solved. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sanitation/Popular_pages. This is on a monthly basis, are you working on a different kind of report?
 * How long after the event closes (I have made it 31 March) will this data be available for in Outreach Dashboard? Does it get deleted or cleared at some point?
 * Would it be possible to set up another event where I could be included as a participant (where e.g. you are the facilitator), together with a few core members of my team and then our work is logged for a longer time period, say a year or two? I know user contibutions can also be monitored on the user page of the person but the dashboard is easier to read for others. I am asking because I work on a grant by the Gates Foundation and as part of the grant I am allowed to book Wikipedia working time to the grant; having the dashboard to show my contributions (together with a handful of others) would be useful.
 * Our edit-a-thon was very successful, we are happy with the outcomes (we are still counting until 31 March): See here. EMsmile (talk) 21:33, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "How long after the event closes" - the dashboard currently updates once a day, so at the end of the day, new activity is added in a rolling total. This means that after an event the dashboard is updated the next day.
 * "Would it be possible to set up another event" - Yes, the facilitator is not counted as a participant, so either I or someone else could set up an event for your team. Yes, it can be ongoing for years.
 * I should warn you - the dashboard is the state of the art for what we have, and it seems to usually work, and it is being developed with paid staff, but it has some bugs. The worst that I have seen is that in some odd cases about 10% of edits were not counted for a team. Usually 100% of edits are counted so some problems can arise. Almost no one worries, and personally, I use it for my reporting (and it is the standard counting system) for if you have a sensitive project that needs an exact count then be aware that this is software in development. Compared to other wiki software, this is one of the more stable tools available.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  21:40, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * thanks for your reply. Actually with this question: "How long after the event closes (I have made it 31 March) will this data be available for in Outreach Dashboard? Does it get deleted or cleared at some point?" I meant to say, will the data (no longer increasing) remain visible forever or will the link to my event and dashboard at one point be cleared and everything set back to zero or completely deleted? - I can give you positive feedback so far, I felt it was all pretty intuitive (except for the non-immediate counting, that surprised me a little). EMsmile (talk) 22:15, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Water Aid
While I'd agree that most of the external links you removed were unnecessary, the UK Charity Commission is a government regulator for charities, and its website includes copies of the charity's constitution and accounts - a very appropriate external link for any registered UK charity, as providing access to a large amount of extra, highly reliable, information on the charity. I've reinstated that link. Pam D  15:51, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah OK, thanks for letting me know, makes sense. User:PamD, and how about making the external link more self explanatory so that future editors won't delete it, too? Perhaps just a couple of words to explain what it is (next to the link). Thanks. EMsmile (talk) 20:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Wastewater photos
Hi - I appreciate your efforts to post more wastewater photos. There are quite a few such photos available on Commons; however they have been categorized in various ways, which may make them hard to find. I have just categorized a lot of U.S. "Water pollution" photos. See the subcategories under https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Water_pollution_in_the_United_States_by_state. Some of these are older photos (from the 1970s) but many are quite sharp; they may need to be color-corrected before using them on an article page.

The Commons categories "wastewater", "water pollution" etc. need to be organized a bit with additional super- or sub-categories, cross-references, etc., so that we can find them all. Cheers, Moreau1 (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, EMsmile (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

 * please help translate this message into your local language via meta

Thanks again :-) --  Doc James  along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Dealing with deadlinks
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not remove citations or information sourced through citations simply because a link to a source is not working, as you did to Menstrual cup. Dead links should not be deleted. Instead, please repair or replace the link, if possible, and ensure properly sourced information is retained. Often, a live substitute link can be found. Links not used as references, notes or citations are not as important, such as those listed in the "External links" or "Further reading" sections, but bad links in those sections should also be fixed if possible. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 32.218.38.9 (talk) 17:33, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think you overlooked how I dealt with the dead link: I did indeed replace it with a working link. Perhaps it was awkward how I did it: I first inserted the new DOI and reference, then I deleted the old one. EMsmile (talk) 17:46, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Links
Hi,

This is a friendly receipt to inform that your message on my talk page has been viewed and replied to. You are more than welcome to proceed with a link clean-up where you feel it is necessary. For a more detailed reply that includes additional thoughts and perspectives (which you may find constructive), please see the response on my talk page. If there are any specific links you have questions about, I am always happy to at least provide an explanation for my rationale, or to reconsider whether a link was relevant. I have also outlined my openness to having other editors provide additional opinions if you felt it would be constructive.

Thank you,Sturgeontransformer (talk) 14:35, 15 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Edit - a previous version of this notification mentioned Third Opinion as something I am open to, but I realized that that's only for actual disputes, which this most certainly is not! That was an error on my part, and may have incorrectly suggested a dispute, which I have no intention of causing. I just wanted to say that I am open to other editors having a look to provide an additional opinion over whether my links should be reduced. Please note that I have also updated the main (longer) response on my talk page to clarify this.


 * Respectfully, Sturgeontransformer (talk) 19:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

About improving page IRC(WASH)
Do you have any suggestions on how to improve the page IRC(WASH)? Up to now there are three problems: relying too much on major sources, not up to notability standard (really?) and not neutral enough. Since you are a true expert editor in WASH-related topics, I would be more than happy if you could spare some time checking this page out and help me with making this page better! Thanks* 10000 times! Faithfully, --Dannyboi886 (talk) 09:14, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've replied on the talk page of IRC(WASH). Let's discuss it further there, Dannyboi886. But you have to hurry: as it is the page might be deleted soon if it's not improved quickly. EMsmile (talk) 12:17, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks User:EMsmile! Actually it is ME who put the delete template up.I created IRC(WASH) but it turns out there are just too many things to be modified before it should be open to the public. (So I deleted most of my edits, see history page). And hopefully this page shall be deleted within a couple of days, I will come back to you after I have sorted all the information out. Peace out! Yours, --Dannyboi886 (talk) 12:24, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Where to put Dietary Recommendations info
I responded to your comment in the Talk section of the Phosphorus article. Also reverted having Dietary Recommendations and Food sources being subtitled to Deficiency. Trying to establish a consistent style for minerals that are essential nutrients. David notMD (talk) 12:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Stabilization pond / treatment pond merge
I used my sandbox to assemble a draft merge for discussion and editing in response to your suggestion that I "...have a go at it." In response to your nudge on my talk page, I was hoping all interested parties might edit or express satisfaction with the draft before we implemented the merge. We don't seem to have heard from the editors of the treatment pond article KVDP or SoCalYooper, but please feel free to cut and paste the merge if you think their lack of response indicates satisfaction or disinterest. Thewellman (talk) 16:07, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Have you a link to your new draft - I couldn't see it in your sandbox (maybe my eyesight is failing!). Thanks  Velella  Velella Talk 16:43, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Thewellman/sandbox2 contains the discussion draft. Thewellman (talk) 19:35, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. This all looks good. At a very quick first glance it looks as though the effects of temperature and UV from sunlight may be understated - most successful uses are in warmer climates with high solar incidence. Having said that, my own experience is that they are very common in rural French communities see here. I would be pleased to assist when I have a few minutes, but I would be also happy to wait until the revised draft is in mainspace as it never feels very comfortable editing another user's sandbox. I will follow your advice. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk  20:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I would also say please move it to mainspace now and we can continue to work on it there together. EMsmile (talk) 21:40, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Just a remark on DIN EN 1500 in hand disinfection illustration...
Hi EMsmile! Thanks for your edit to the figure caption of the illustration "Hand disinfection" in the article "Hand washing". Personally, I don't mind if the DIN EN 1500 is mentioned or not. I just wanted to draw the attention to the following: AFAIK, the DIN EN 1500 was originally not intended for describing everyday hand disinfection, e.g. by health care professionals. It was developed to describe a standardized procedure for testing of hand disinfectants. Testers were required to adhere to this procedure so that the results (e.g. remaining bacteria on hands) could be compared between different suppliers. The DIN EN 1500 then became an almost standard in hand disinfection in German hospitals, although it was never developed to this end. By mentioning the DIN EN 1500 below the illustration, I wanted to give a hint to the source of this procedure, so that the reader could find the origin if they wanted to. Unfortunately I couldn't find a link to the original text of the DIN that is freely available (seems that this DIN text has to be bought). What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guido4 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Let's put this rather on the talk page of the handwashing article. I'll move it to there. How about we say "According to a German standard for xxx". EMsmile (talk) 17:17, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Zusammenarbeit
Du schreibst auf Englisch viel besser als ich auf Deutsch schreibe. Dein technisches Englisch ist fast perfekt. Ihre Bearbeitung ist verwirrend.

Sie scheinen meine Kommentare zu ignorieren. Vielleicht verstehst du das nicht. Wie kann ich unsere Kommunikation verbessern? Thewellman (talk) 20:56, 3 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Let's just stick to English. If you think our communication is not working well, then maybe write to me directly, just e-mail me: elisabeth.muench@ostella.de. I saw also your comment about "Germans" on the talk page of User:Velella. Both comments I find rather odd. Where exactly am I ignoring your comments? If it's on the talk page of treatment pond, I have answered every comment there. If you think I don't understand technical or non-technical English well, I would just like to point out that Wikipedia articles are written for the general public and for laypersons. We should write in a manner that it is easily understood - but still correct. It's a fine balance. Over simplification is equally bad as overly complex writing. Overall, the readability scores are very low on many Wikipedia articles. That's why we have started this drive on Sanitation Wikipedia. You're welcome to join it and help make the Wikipedia articles more easily understood by non-native English speaking people. EMsmile (talk) 22:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I am sincerely interested in improving communication with you as an active editor; because usefulness of Wikipedia is enhanced by collaboration of divergent cultures. I contacted User:Velella because of your choice for comment on our disagreement; and I hoped an individual from the European Union might have had more experience dealing with German professionals and might suggest techniques to improve communication. I perceive our communications problems to involve procedures and information structure rather than readability. I wonder, for example, if German Wikipedia has disambiguation pages, or if widespread adoption of Latin words makes English vulnerable to misunderstanding in ways native German speakers might fail to recognize. I similarly wonder if German Wikipedia has navigation bars of the sort which precipitated our earlier discussion about placement of sewers, or if navigation bars are absent or serve some different purpose which might explain what seems to me an obsessive focus on precision which obscures functional categorization.
 * You asked exactly where you have ignored my comments:
 * 1) After you have cut and pasted from my sandbox to the chosen title, if you replace the treatment pond article with a redirect, I will expand the redirect into a disambiguation page. Talk:Waste stabilization pond 3 October 2017
 * 2) I would prefer to delay the merge until consensus is received from two major editors of the Treatment pond article (KVDP and SoCalYooper); but I have no objection to other editors who might wish to be bolder. Talk:Waste stabilization pond 22 October 2017
 * was followed by your response on 26 October 2017 OK, so I have placed a redirect from stabilization pond to waste stabilization pond. This page here now needs to be converted into a disambiguation page, right? As stated above "convert the treatment pond article to a disambiguation page listing the broader range of pond articles describing differing design features intended to improve water quality." Can you do so, User:Thewellman?
 * requiring me to repeat on 27 October 2017 I suggest the first step would be to replace this article with a redirect, indicating the merged article contains the essential elements of this article. I would prefer to delay that replacement until consensus is received from two major editors KVDP and SoCalYooper that the merged article meets their satisfaction. Once the article is replaced by a redirect following this procedure, I am prepared to replace that redirect with a disambiguation page.
 * 3) Will this distinction be evident to laypersons using the term treatment pond? Talk:Treatment pond 31 October 2017 Your entire response was focused on technical literature and source citations rather than interpretations by laypersons of the general public.

Thewellman (talk) 04:37, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Continued conversation
From here: Sorry I let that conversation go but I had some other things to work on, one of which is List of air rage incidents, which starts off (well, almost) with the United 976 incident (given that it's still regarded as one of the worst cases of air rage ever, I think it could support a standalone article. But I should probably save that for the 25th anniversary in 2020).

It also occurs to me in this, uh, vein, that there's another topic that could go under or  that might not readily occur to people but would support a standalone article: excremental assault, the term created by Holocaust scholar Terrence des Pres for what seemed to him to have been a deliberate policy on the Nazis' part of surrounding the death-camp inmates with mud and shit as a way of undermining their dignity before killing them (here are other references to it. I remember in that vein Charlotte Delbo writing that the, uh, bouquet of Auschwitz was equal parts burning flesh, rotting flesh and excrement. Perhaps next year to have a DYK for Holocaust Remembrance Day ...

I suppose with this much in mind I may at some point accept your invitation and join WP:SANITATION. Daniel Case (talk) 03:17, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


Ozzie10aaaa (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Water Use's name change to Water Footprint
Dear EMsmile, thank you for getting the ball rolling on this. It was a real eye-sore, and now it is a proper article once more. Thanks again. – Sampa (talk) 21:33, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Copying licensed material requires proper attribution
Hi. I see in a recent addition to Constructed wetland you included material from a webpage that is available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this legal requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi User:Diannaa, thanks for letting me know about this new method of adding that symbol into the reference list. I had mentioned in the edit summary that I had taken content from the open access website and also given the reference, so I thought that would be sufficient. But your method makes it even clearer. What happens though when future editors modify the text blocks and perhaps eventually it gets changed into "new" text? Then the note in the reference list is no longer valid? EMsmile (talk) 13:50, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi EMsmile and thanks for your question. The license permits us (and re-users of our content) to "remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially", so re-writing, copy edits, etc are perfectly okay. You could add a note that as of this date the material was a copy, but I don't think that's necessary. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! Sorry for writing in English. The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

--WMF Surveys (talk) 01:32, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Rearranged
Hi, I rearranged your recent additions at Talk:Global warming in accord with the TPG section on layout. The moves are explained in the edit summaries and/or reply comments. I did not change any of your text. If you don't know, section headings do not belong to anyone, and anyone can change them if they have a good reason. Also, FYI, I broke one of your multiple topic paragraphs into different sections per TPG and when I did that I copy/pasted your signature and timestamp to each part so we can keep an orderly discussion. I hope this hasn't been too much irritation and I'm trying to be a help, not a jerk. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:28, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi.... I haven't agreed with you much at global warming.... yet..... but I do appreciate you're interest. Keep it coming! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:03, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey
Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 26% of Wikimramedia contributors who Wikimedia programs like the Education program, editathons, or image contests. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you are not fluent in English, I apologize again for posting in English. If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone.If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thank you! —WMF Surveys (talk) 17:18, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Wikimedia survey (corrected link)
Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 26% of Wikimramedia contributors who Wikimedia programs like the Education program, editathons, or image contests. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed.Take the survey now.

If you are not fluent in English, I apologize for posting in English. If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks! —WMF Surveys (talk) 17:24, 15 April 2018 (UTC)