User talk:Edgar181/Archive36

Salt?
It's back. Rivertorch  FIRE WATER   03:34, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. If I'm recognizing this correctly, this is the work of a persistent individual, so it will be back if not salted.  Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. I put a speedy tag on it a while back, then had forgotten all about it until it popped up on my watchlist. Maybe I'm not with it today, but I guess I'm not clear on why creation of standalone talk pages is allowed outside of user space.  Rivertorch   FIRE WATER   16:09, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I've seen talk pages being used to suggest the creation of an article, but there would be other ways of doing that if the talk page couldn't be created. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:00, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC has clarified that user categories should be emptied upon deletion, but redlinked user categories should not be removed if re-added by the user.
 * Discussions are ongoing regarding proposed changes to the COI policy. Changes so far have included clarification that adding a link on a Wikipedia forum to a job posting is not a violation of the harassment policy.

Technical news
 * You can now see a list of all autoblocks at Special:AutoblockList.
 * There is a new tool for adding archives to dead links. Administrators are able to restrict other user's ability to use the tool, and have additional permissions when changing URL and domain data.
 * Administrators, bureaucrats and stewards can now set an expiry date when granting user rights. (discuss, permalink)

Miscellaneous
 * Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:19, 2 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)

Revision deletion request
Hi, could you please delete revision 778667050 from Third-wave feminism under criterion RD2? Thanks! ToThAc (talk) 15:18, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I don't see how that edit qualifies under criteria RD2. Can you elaborate on your concerns?  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:41, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Block evation
Regarding your block of IP92.29.120.78, it is true that their edits are a block evasion, but not as a sock of IP104.129.196.50. The 92.29.x.x range (alternating with 92.28.x.x and 92.24.x.x, all from TalkTalk, Ipswich) is one of the trade marks of User:Shingling334, see Sockpuppet investigations/Shingling334. Regards! --T*U (talk) 19:41, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks for letting me know.  I have marked the IP as a suspected sock of Shingling334.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

IP 124.153.32.65
Hello, You earlier blocked this IP here. Two other IPs have made the same edit to the same page today (Toyota AA). All three geolocate to the same provider in the same area: See here and here. Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 15:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Since the IP is changing, semi-protection seems to be the way to go. The page is now semi-protected.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:53, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. Eagleash (talk) 15:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protect
Can you semi-protect Now That's What I Call Music! 61 (U.S. series) and Now That's What I Call Music! discography to persistent long-term abuse (Long-term abuse/Wikidesctruction vandal) 115.164.81.159 (talk) 16:11, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. Both are now semi-protected.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Tritium
A significant portion of the plot of Spider-Man 2 revolved around tritium, thus Spider-Man 2 links to tritium. You recently removed a reciprocal link without explanation. Wikipedia articles frequently contain links to fictional uses, many times even containing a "popular culture" section. While a simple link under "See also" is less than ideal, it appears to have been a good faith addition. I can understand if you don't want to take the time to improve the article yourself, but had you left it alone some other user may have come along and improved upon it. --Pascal666 10:02, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Tritium plays a role in the movie, but it really has little to do with real world tritium itself - they could have replaced it with unobtainium and the movie would have been the same. I wouldn't object if someone wants to write a section about the role of tritium in popular culture, but I don't think a simple contextless link from the article on tritium to the article on Spider Man 2 is very relevant or useful.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:20, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:10, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

My change to a block of yours
Your thanks for my edit at User talk:The George E Knotnaym Organization drew my attention to the fact that I failed to do what I intended to do, which was drop you a note telling you what I had done. Presumably the fact that you thanked me indicates that you don't object to my change, but even so in most situations I regard it as a courtesy to let another admin know when one changes their admin actions, and I apologise for not doing so. At first glance, I too read the situation the way you did, but looking more closely it became perfectly clear that it was a hoax, not promotion by a real organisation. (And if you haven't already done so, just think about the name "George E Knotnaym" for a moment. ) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries. No need to apologize.  I clearly didn't look closely enough.  Thanks for switching to a more appropriate block.  Regards,  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:18, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Beat me to it
You just beat me to this revert Sario528 (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

An 'out of curiosity' question, that's all :)
Re. this, that's interesting. I don't think I've ever seen that before at UAA. Can that be done then- like oversighting an entire account? &mdash; O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  12:36, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize it at the time, but the reason the account didn't exist was because the editor who made the report formatted the template incorrectly. But to answer your question, user creation logs can be oversighted (I think) or otherwise hidden.  I'm not sure about the details though. I don't know if those accounts appears as if they were never created in the first place.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Propynyllithium
Hi,

I hope you are doing well. I have created the article about compound propynyllithium. May I ask you to review it? I have mostly translated the text from the Dutch wikipedia.

Best regards, Lamro (talk) 08:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It looks great. Thank you for creating the article.  I made a few small changes only.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:02, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Capillin
Hi there,

Thanks a lot for reviewing my articles! I am not a professional chemist, but this science has always been my passion.))

May you take a look at capillin?

Cheerz!

Lamro (talk) 18:18, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It looks good to me. You're doing just fine considering this isn't your area of expertise.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:52, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Questionable activity
Please see this. Thanks in advance.--205.175.118.98 (talk) 22:02, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a little suspicious, but multiple accounts are acceptable in some circumstances. Without any edits from either account, I don't think anything needs to be done at the moment.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:50, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Ynone
Hi

Pls, take a look at Ynone.

Lamro (talk) 12:42, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Thanks for creating it.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:14, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Threat
Hi, Edgar, I see you had already got to SchoolKashooter999 when I went to block them and revdel the threat. Everybody's always faster than me! I've alerted Emergency — I don't know if you have, too — and they're on it. This is just to tell you I figured the user should have tpa revoked as well, so I did that. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
 * Yes, I sent a message to the emergency email address too. Revdel on the edits at UAA and removing talk page access are good ideas.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Calcium sulfate
Hi Edgard181,

You just moved the new section on retrograde solubility of calcium sulfate I was busy to edit since a whole time this evening (in Europe). It caused an Edit conflict between our respective contributions.

I have prudently merged our respective works as recommended by the Wikipedia helpbox suddenly appearing on my screen: I have not changed your contribution. I hope nothing is lost from my contribution. The graph about the retrograde solubility displayed very poorly on the small screen of my notebook when it was originally aligned to the right just below the infobox. Greetings. Shinkolobwe (talk) 22:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I "stepped on your toes" as you were working on the article. I hope none of your work was lost.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:17, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Board Of Higher Secondary Education (BHSE), Delhi
You may wish to revoke talk page access. Also see User:Board Of Higher Secondary Education.--Cahk (talk) 20:38, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Talk page is now deleted and access revoked. Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:01, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Cyclopropylacetylene
Hi,

I have created Cyclopropylacetylene. May you pls review it? Most of the text has been taken and translated from the Dutch wiki.

Cheerz!

Lamro (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Doug Bell • Dennis Brown • Clpo13 • ONUnicorn
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg ThaddeusB • Yandman • Bjarki S • OldakQuill • Shyam • Jondel • Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news
 * An RfC proposing an off-wiki LTA database has been closed. The proposal was broadly supported, with further discussion required regarding what to do with the existing LTA database and defining access requirements. Such a tool/database formed part of the Community health initiative's successful grant proposal.
 * Some clarifications have been made to the community banning and unblocking policies that effectively sync them with current practice. Specifically, the community has reached a consensus that when blocking a user at WP:AN or WP:ANI, it is considered a "community sanction", and administrators cannot unblock unilaterally if the user has not successfully appealed the sanction to the community.
 * An RfC regarding the bot policy has closed with changes to the section describing restrictions on cosmetic changes.

Technical news
 * Users will soon be able to blacklist specific users from sending them notifications.

Miscellaneous
 * Following the 2017 elections, the new members of the Board of Trustees include Raystorm, Pundit and Doc James. They will serve three-year terms.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

new stuff
Hi

May I ask you to review my new articles: Fluoroacetone, Dienochlor, Iodoacetone?

Thanks a lot!

Lamro (talk) 08:01, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I added images to a couple of them and made a few minor changes, but they all look very good to me. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:47, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

2 more
Hi,

Thanks for reviewing my articles! I have just created two more: trifluoromethanol and trifluoroacetone. May you take a look? The texts have mostly been borrowed from German wiki.

Cheerz!

Lamro (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

The Aryl halide page
No problem. I was just about to form a Grignard from 1-bromonapthalene in THF. The reaction worked OK, but it needed a crystal of I2 and heating to reflux temp to get it to start.

See you around, NSEasternShoreChemistChat 19:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Please salt
Please salt kris degioia article if anyone here did there research you would has saw on www.krisdegioia.com that in the random facts section she clearly states she DOES NOT WANT A WIKIPEDIA PAGE. 107.0.14.165 (talk) 22:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think I have anything to do with this and it's not entirely clear what you want from me. If you are asking me to prevent the page Kris Degioia from being recreated, another administrator already did that last month.  Because of the amount of promotional editing and abuse of sock puppets involved, that page currently can only be created by administrators.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Pinocembrin
Hi Edgar,

For once, it's not for a CAS number for a compound but in inverse, the compound for the CAS number 68745-38-0 I found for Pinocembrin on PubChem CID 238782. May be it's the CAS for a salt of Pinocembrin but which one ? Thanks in advance --Titou (talk) 14:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Here is what I have found from CAS:
 * 68745-38-0 is (±)-Pinocembrin
 * 480-39-7 is (S)-(+)-Pinocembrin
 * 206660-42-6 is (R)-(-)-Pinocembrin
 * -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:19, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * thanks a lot !!! --Titou (talk) 12:31, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Deleted
Hello Edgar181

You deleted my draft titled Lockland Wayne High School. Was this an arbitrary deletion on your part? Sharen Sierra (talk) 05:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Sharen Sierra
 * No, it wasn't arbitrary at all. Drafts that have not been edited for over six months are eligible for speedy deletion (see WP:CSD for detials) and it had been nearly a year since Draft:Lockland Wayne High School had been submitted and declined.  However, under this deletion criteria the page can be restored upon request, so I will do so now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:17, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Pyridine alkaloids
Hiya, You Deleted the above but WP:R2. Cross-namespace redirects states This applies to Redirects, apart from shortcuts, from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces. Thank You, Bosley John Bosley (talk) 11:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're right. That limitation slipped my mind.  I have restored the page and turned it into a short stub.  Please feel free to expand it if you wish.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:11, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Phosphaphenalene
Could you make an image of 1-phosphaphenalene (which is as far as I can tell the main isomer of phosphaphenalene) to replace the current one of 9b-phosphaphenalene (which isn't a notable isomer) for the phosphaphenalene article? OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 14:54, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. Here it is:  File:1-phosphaphenalene.svg.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 16:35, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Alcohol
Hello. I am not David J. Hanson or an individual in any way connected to him. However, I am fairly familiar with much of the subject matter, as I'd assume are many others. Minds drift towards authors who express their views. Not only was it an incorrect assumption to link me to some purported conspiracy, but your claim here is currently more unsubstantiated than are Hanson's beliefs. It is "unfair" at best to name-call or label anyone with a perspective far away from yours as a "vandal." Furthermore some of your qualms are nearly a moot point. Sock-puppetry accusations are a type of ad hominem attack. There is little substance in a complaint about a person making good edits, because they used IP's. I presume that you don't like Hanson's views, notwithstanding his web page being full of footnote citations. A great deal of other people and many other European countries collectively hold more holistic opinions about alcohol. The fact of the matter is that because Hanson is an established expert with a previous record of third-party publications on a topic; in this case, his self-published work may be considered reliable for that topic according to the linked Wikipedia policy. If you actually have read his publications, then why don't you discredit his central point in a manner more consistent with Wikipedia dispute resolution policy, rather than go after his character and wrongly sweeping-up others in the process? And just so you know, my views are much different than Hanson's; the only person who holds an individual's exact same views on every world matter is the individual himself. I actually believe alcohol is vastly under-recognized as a neurotoxin, and greater consumer warning protections are needed against its permanent effects. However, Hanson is not a pathologist, nor is he giving medical advice, and there is some merit to his assessment of both alcohol sociology, criminology, and the overstatement of its short-term risks to adult infrequent users, as many behaviors are much worse that don't involve chemicals, even behind the wheel.

PS. I had originally contacted you on what seemed as the appropriate page, but you deleted it, so here's towards the prospect of having a discussion in a place you would like.
 * There are many things wrong with what you are complaining about. First of all, your presumption that I don't like Hanson's views is entirely incorrect.  My personal views probably align more closely with his views than with those of the organizations he criticizes.  But this is not about Hanson's beliefs or about my beliefs. This is about behavior - about misusing Wikipedia and violating its policies and terms of use.  The conclusion of the three sock puppet investigations (here, here, and here) is that Hanson and/or individuals connected to him were abusing multiple accounts to promote his work.  There is no question whatsoever that IP addresses that have been engaged in this behavior have also been used for edits that are unambiguously vandalism.  This disruption has been a persistent issue, ongoing for many years. Because of this behavior, many of the accounts and IP addresses involved have been blocked from editing.  In addition, most of the pages targeted have had to be protected from editing in order to prevent the abuse.  Please be aware that these actions to protect Wikipedia from this abusive behavior have been done mostly by other site administrators, not by me.  At the very least, there are unquestionably contraventions of Sock puppetry, Vandalism, Edit warring, and Conflict of interest.  The issue regarding Neutral point of view, which you seem most concerned about, is a lesser concern that can be addressed by discussion on the talk pages of the articles involved.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the thoughtful reply, and my due apologies for presuming incorrectly. The problem is that this page is being used in substance to perform ad hominem attacks on anyone who cites Hanson's work, which is wrong let alone a bit intellectually dishonest. Regarding neutrality, I have seen no measurement of current public opinion on this issue, as if reason and "truth" are actually a popularity contest. Now, I knew little about any abuse that had occurred over the years, but what I can surmise from what you did shed light—the three sock puppet investigations—is that material controversy was central to an edit war which resulted in a proponent of Hanson's work getting banned, and then that individual tried to get around the blocks with puppet accounts. That evidence is sufficient. So is the ensuing immaturity. It is also compelling that some individuals who pushed these investigations likely do not like Hanson's views and were not quite objective in the matter either. I can't so far as warrant any conclusion that the banned individual was initially wrong or dishonest in his publishing, it appears at a minimum he/she was boldly editing which in-and-of-itself is encouraged and is not abuse. Also the serial "sock-puppetry" does not appear as traditional—directly gaming consensus in an edit war, but more substantively serial block evasions.
 * With regards to abuse, it should be stated that COI is not prohibited per se despite the community's clear ability to forbid it:
 * COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia...Editors with a COI, including paid editors, are expected to disclose it whenever they seek to influence an affected article's content
 * I'm not going to argue COI is a good thing, but to play the devil's advocate, it is not itself abuse which is why it is even permitted, and in this case it looks like it certainly provoked page development that ultimately benefited Wikipedia (policy objective); COI as a means to a mere first draft, is probably a much lesser evil than ad hominem fallacy. Lets face it, all authors have some degree of vested interest beginning with the ego. It is not so that you can't contribute expertise on a topic the moment you have a website or a facebook. We are actually more in the dark about all other edits to the contrary! Authors seek to influence knowledge, a concurrent website is not necessary or relevant. The fact of the matter is there is no profit here.
 * Boldly editing itself is not vandalism. Those three investigations ironically take us full circle to neutral point of view—as you bring up—seeming to be the origin of all of this. And there is no shortage of unpopular or heretical views that are now recognized as mainstream science. If you describe a debate rather than censor it, you will never be on the wrong side of history; even if politics and funding move from Just Say No to decriminalize and legalize it, for better or for worse.


 * Last, I have never communicated or associated with Hanson, though you have strangely associated this IP. Any well informed person would not post to the world their home IP—if they have one—and likewise it is unlikely that all posts on all pages are by the same person on any shared internet source. With regard to the latter, I'm sure there are enough illusory dots to connect anything or anyone randomly to almost anything or anyone. It honestly makes no difference to me except your statement about this IP is not truth. And also I must admit, I am extremely interested to know how one clearly deludes the Boeing 747 shenanigans into "alcohol vandalism!" I'd bet hard with the null hypothesis on that one. As far as I can tell, nothing about alcohol has been frivolous. Anyone who touches this topic becomes contaminated by this. To be fair, it looks like there is some blatant abuse, but you are wrongly assuming bad intentions from the many as a means to catch the few. A final word of caution is not to be gaming the system yourself:
 * Mischaracterizing other editors' actions in order to make them seem unreasonable, improper, or deserving of sanction.
 * Arguing the word of policy to defeat the principles of policy.
 * Removing a large addition for a minor error. If the error is minor, then fix it.
 * It is now my impression that some of the abuse is to disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point:
 * If you feel that a particular source does not meet Wikipedia standards, do not add even more references to the source, with hopes of provoking opposition to its use.

Liriodendrin
Hi, I found the 2 CAS numbers for this compound, 573-44-4 and 96038-87-8 which are gived too on PubChem CID73636. Why this compound have two CAS ?? thanks for your help --Titou (talk) 06:07, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 573-44-4 is liriodendrin. 96038-87-8 is a structure with the same connectivity, but with no stereochemistry defined.  Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Nudah
Just curious, but you blocked this user without a block reason (it's just blank), and they don't appear to have any visible contributions either. I'm guessing that it's some sort of sock puppetry, seeing that this account was also blocked. Regards. 2601:1C0:10B:9EA4:CC06:F9E1:52DD:1E95 (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello and heads-up: I monitor edit filter 803 (log here), which prevents unconfirmed users from editing other users' pages, and there are dozens of recent entries with attempted edits of the User:Nudah page right now, from many different IPs and accounts. Too many to easily warn/report so I thought I'd contact you since you blocked the targeted user. Funcrunch (talk) 01:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I see you've already reported it. Funcrunch (talk) 03:11, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep, this user and many many others were part of an off-wiki-coordinated attempt to disrupt Wikipedia. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:00, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Trithiapentalene
Could you please create a better image for the trithiapentalene for the article I started? Note that the geometry of the current one is wrong, it should be more like naphthalene with the carbons at positions 1 and 8 removed, the sulfur atoms are just about colinear. Also, if it isn't to much trouble, could you create an image showing the resonance structures of trithiapentalene, maybe with them labeled somehow so that they can be individually referenced in the text? Thanks in advance. P.S. If you want or need any clarification about what I'm asking please ask here or on my talk page. OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 04:50, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. I have created File:Trithiapentalene.svg and File:Trithiapentalene resonance.svg.  If that's not exactly what you're looking for, please just let me know and I can adjust them.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Could you make a version also showing the resonance structures where the middle sulfur has a positive charge and a negative charge is delocalized across the carbons? OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * How is this? File:Trithiapentalene resonance v2.svg  -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Not quite what I meant. I meant three additional resonance structures with a positive charge on the middle sulfur and a negative charge on one of three carbons in each. If that makes sense. OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Wait, now that I think about it, it is fine as is. OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 17:32, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

User talk:118 alex
Could you revoke talk page access ? Thanks —72 talk 14:31, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:33, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I appreciate stepping in on my talk page after it was vandalized. I see 118alex has been indeffed, and there is good reason for that, but I wonder if perhaps a definite term might be appropriate, given that the user claims personal tragedy on his former user page, and he appears to have edited constructively in the past. Something odd here. Figureofnine (talk • contribs)  15:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, the racist edits are inexcusable under any circumstances. However, an indefinite block isn't necessarily permanent.  For someone who is blocked and has had talk page access revoked, there is still a method of appeal:  Unblock Ticket Request System.  Presumably, a blocked user is informed by the system of this avenue of appeal (if not, please feel free to leave a message on 118 alex's talk page to let him know).  I won't have an objection to an unblock if he is able to convince UTRS members that something totally unacceptable such as today's behavior won't happen again.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * True enough. If indeed this was some kind of temporary trauma, he can make that point. Thanks. Figureofnine (talk • contribs) 16:33, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

User:118 alex
It seems he has made many unconstructive edits using his sockpuppets. Please block and lock them all because they have vandalised Singapore Bus Interchange articles. (Joo Koon, Woodlands) 180.255.242.90 (talk) 05:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure which articles or which sock accounts you are referring to, but it looks like this was handled at WP:ANI in my absence. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:25, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

CAS number of Homodihydrocapsaicin and Cholestane
Hi Edgar,

On Homodihydrocapsaicin, there is the CAS number 279-06-5 said verified but on PubChem CID3084336 the CAS number done is 20279-06-5 as well as on the pages of vendors done by PubChem. Could you please unravel this problematic tangle ? thanks in advance --Titou (talk) 13:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Same problem on Cholestane : CAS #481-21-0 verified on wp and CAS#14982-53-7 on PubChem CID6857534 ... --Titou (talk) 14:07, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * According to Chemical Abstracts 20279-06-5 is the CAS number for homodihydrocapsaicin and 279-06-5 is not even a valid format for a CAS number. 481-21-0 is the CAS number for 5α-cholestane.  481-20-9 is the CAS number for 5β-cholestane.  14982-53-7 is the CAS number for cholestane with unspecified stereochemistry at the 5-position.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:22, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, I hope you have a good trip ! I see your answer now. Thanks a lot for it, you are really unbeatable for the CAS numbers. Bravo! --Titou (talk) 18:42, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Rangeblock
Hello there, a couple days ago, you blocked the range 2605:E000:ACC1:EC00/64 for presistent addition of uncited material and disruptive editing over it. Maybe I just missed it before that, but they came back at least yesterday, and again with the same kind of hostile behaviour. Could you re-apply the block, but this time for a longer duration? Also, is there a way to view all edits made by IPs from that range? Cheers! Lordtobi ( &#9993; ) 08:50, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * In my absence another admin, Widr, handed out a one week block to the range. If the problem returns when the block expires, please let me know and I'll extend it again.  If you wish to check the contributions from this range you can do so like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=2605%3AE000%3AACC1%3AEC00%3A*  For this to work you have to have check the box next to "Allow /16, /24 and /27 – /32 CIDR ranges on Special:Contributions forms, as well as wildcard prefix searches" in the Gadgets section of Preferences.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Happyme22 • Dragons flight
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Zad68

Guideline and policy news
 * The RFC discussion regarding WP:OUTING and WMF essay about paid editing and outing (see more at the ArbCom noticeboard archives) is now archived. Milieus #3 and #4 received support; so did concrete proposal #1.

Technical news
 * Fuzzy search will soon be added to Special:Undelete, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding ?fuzzy=1 to the URL, as with Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
 * A new bot will automatically revision delete unused file versions from files in Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old.

Miscellaneous
 * A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
 * A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
 * Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Aminophosphonates and related topics
Hi Edgar, I have been writing articles on compounds of the type (RO)2P(O)H, and would welcome any advice you might have to offer. --Smokefoot (talk) 20:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I have called these things dialkyphosphites, which is a pretty common name, but some call them phosphonates. The big member of this class is diethylphosphite.  If you have strong feelings on the nomenclature aspect, let me know.  Part of my incentive inw riting these up was to preempt any attempt to rigidly apply IUPAC rules.  I am an inorganic chemist, and to us phosphite means only P(OR)3, but Google search convinced me that others use phosphite more broadly to include these phosphorus(V) species.
 * Aminophosphonates are apparently popular derivatives, in the med chem area as sort of isosteres (?) of amino acids. Take a look at that article when you get a chance.
 * I'd be happy to take a look the articles shortly when I return from traveling. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:40, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Creatine Page Protection
Hi there! I've seen ya around, so good to finally chat with ya. It seems as though the Creatine page has been indefinitely page protected from 2011. I feel like it's about time to open it back up. If you have any thoughts to the contrary, I'm more than happy to hear them. Thanks, in advance! Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  21:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The article has been a persistent target of vandalism and spamming, but I agree that it's worth a try to allow IP editing. I have switched from semi-protection to pending changes - IPs can edit, but those edits need review from another editor before they are seen by the public.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me, thanks! Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  22:59, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

jytdog is giving me a hard time
He has reverted my factual edits to the article Charlie Gard treatment controversy for no apparent reason. I feel this is because he does not understand the biochemical mechanisms of the disease in question - could you somehow mitigate this problem as he appears to not want communicate with me any further.

Best Regaruds, 69.125.160.200 (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2017 (UTC) (AKA MFernflower)
 * I'm not sure what you would like me to do. He responded promptly and politely to your comments on his talk page and there are multiple editors, including Jytdog, discussing changes to the article at Talk:Charlie Gard treatment controversy.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:08, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

IP 82.32.50.222
Hi Edgar181. You blocked IP 82.32.50.222 for a year back in November 2016. I'm not sure whether its the same person, but someone using the IP has just copied and pasted parts of or entire articles onto the talk page. It appears that the talk page was protected by at the beginning of last June, but that protection has run out. I stumbled upon this because part of the content the IP copied and pasted included some non-free images, which in turn were flagged as WP:NFCC violations. I removed the images, but left the other stuff since I'm not sure what the IP's intentions are. Maybe you could take a peek when you get some time to see if the rest should be removed as well. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:29, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely the same individual - this is a persistent long-term problem. I have cleaned up the talk page and revoked access to it.  Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:06, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Crimea articles vandal
Hi Edgar, I noticed you blocked this IP editor for disruptive editing. I think, and certainly  might be the same guy evading the block.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:32, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Since this person is rapidly changing IPs, blocking them probably won't help much.  At least some of the pages have now been semi-protected by other admins, which should solve the problem for now.  If the problem continues at any other article, please just request semi-protection at WP:RFPP.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:16, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

New question about CAS numbers
Hi Edgar,

I have two questions :
 * 1) why Tris(2-aminoethyl)amine have two CAS numbers: 4097-89-6 and 14350-52-8, see Pub Chem CID77731?
 * 2) Could you find CAS numbers for the isomers of B18H22? see the french page B18H22

Thank you in advance --Titou (talk) 16:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * CAS# 4097-89-6 is the free base of tris(2-aminoethyl)amine. CAS# 14350-52-8 is the 3HCl salt of tris(2-aminoethyl)amine.
 * Here is everything Chemical Abstracts has for B18H22:
 * 1159003-89-0	Octadecaborane(22)
 * 910038-63-0	Nonaborane(11), dimer (unspecified isomer)
 * 21107-45-9	Decaborano(14)[5',6':5,6]decaborane(14)
 * 29356-42-1	Decaborano(14)[5',6':5,6]decaborane(14), (+)-
 * 21107-56-2	Decaborano(14)[6',7':5,6]decaborane(14)
 * 12513-42-7	Octadecaborane(22) (unspecified isomer)
 * I don't know enough about boron hydride nomenclature to match these names to particular structures. I hope this helps.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:18, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a series of discussions around new pages patrol, the WMF is helping implement a controlled autoconfirmed article creation trial as a research experiment, similar to the one proposed in 2011. You can learn more about the research plan at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial. The exact start date of the experiment has yet to be determined.
 * A new speedy deletion criterion, regarding articles created as a result undisclosed paid editing, is currently being discussed (permalink).
 * An RfC (permalink) is currently open that proposes expanding WP:G13 to include all drafts, even if they weren't submitted through Articles for Creation.

Technical news
 * LoginNotify should soon be deployed to the English Wikipedia. This will notify users when there are suspicious login attempts on their account.
 * The new version of XTools is nearing an official release. This suite of tools includes administrator statistics, an improved edit counter, among other tools that may benefit administrators. You can report issues on Phabricator and provide general feedback at mw:Talk:XTools.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

CAS number of CrI3
Hi Edgar,

I found CAS number 13569-75-0 for Chromium(III) iodide and 12750-98-0 for the same on the site of one vendor. What is really true ? thank you in advance --Titou (talk) 14:46, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * CAS#12750-98-0 is chromium iodide with an unspecified ratio of the two elements (CrxIy). CAS# 13569-75-0 is specifically chromium(III) iodide.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:16, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

CAS numbers!
Hello again,

I hope you could answer to this very sharp questions : Among the isomers of Dipropylene glycol there is 2-(2-hydroxypropoxy) -1-propanol (HOCH2-C*H(CH3)-O-CH2-C*HOH-CH3, CAS number #106-62-7) which has two chiral carbon atoms, the 3 and 5 according to ChemSketch. Could you find the CAS numbers of the racemates, if they have one and/or those for the 2 pairs of enantiomers as well as their senses of optical activity +/-, if possible - See fr:C6H14O3. In fact, I realize that the other two isomers of Dipropylene glycol also have chiral carbon atoms but with a plane of symmetry (racemic + meso compound) and therefore same questions for 1,1'-oxydi-2-propanol, CAS No. 110-98-5 and 2,2'-oxydi-1-propanol, CAS No. 108-61-2.

If everything works well, there would be 3 + 3 + 4 + 4 = 14 CAS numbers to find at most. Thanks for your help --Titou (talk) 10:48, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It was easiest for me to make an image out of this one: File:Dipropylene glycol CAS numbers.png.  That's everything that Chemical Abstracts has for dipropylene glycol isomers.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Again thank you very much for all those informations --Titou (talk) 17:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

US Zines
Hi, Edgar !

I'm a French Wikipedia user and my contributions are primarily about French History or, in the current time, Lovecraft and the "Cthulhu Mythos" : thus, I wrote the French Elder Gods page and I'm planning to participate in most other related pages (currently, I upgrade all the bibliography).

Naturally, I rely on a sizable collection of Lovecraft Studies and Crypt of Cthulhu zines, many books from S. T. Joshi, Robert M. Price, Steven J. Mariconda, etc. and some rarities. I'm trying to collect several other studies written by HPL scholars but, alas, some sellers offer shipping only to addresses within the U.S., international shipping is not available...

So forgive me for being so bold but would you be kind enough to receive at your home just one of my purchase, i.e. a package of US lovecraftian zines (without compromising your home, or course) ? Needless to say, in order to send the package to Paris, I will pay you the global shipping costs using Paypal.

Do not hesitate to ask for more clarifications or to refuse if it doesn't suit you (I won't take offence ! :)).

Best regards,

--Guise (talk) 16:45, 12 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm generally eager to help out other Wikipedians, but in the interest of protecting my anonymity and privacy, I'm sorry but I will decline in this instance. However, please don't hesitate to ask if there are other things I can do for you online.  Regards,  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem, Edgar, I perfectly understand. :) Casually, do you know where I can ask preferably for this favour (on some special board of the village pump) ? Or maybe do you have a suggestion concerning a trusted and non-anonymous US contributor ? Best regards. --Guise (talk) 12:28, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Language of Business
I'm a Wikipedia user but have stayed out of this debate, to avoid any COI. Would it be possible, please, to set up a private chat or phone call so I can properly clean up this page? I'm a novice Wikipedia user and simply trying to do the right thing, following all Wikipedia standards and general business ethics. Thank you for your consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gstoller (talk • contribs) 13:58, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, the subject of the article does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements for inclusion. Therefore, cleaning up the page isn't the issue.  In regards to your statement about conflict of interest, what is your connection to the subject?  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:33, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

41.138.78.55
So you blocked them for 24h... Have a look:

I'm not sure blocking is needed, looks like you would block a major town in Botswana. Anyway, a major case of CIR. 80.132.69.170 (talk) 13:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand your concern about blocking a major town - I've only blocked a single static IP in that range and I don't see evidence that it is widely shared. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:08, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Micky Maus
Back in 2009, this page was deleted/recreated until permanent protection was put in place. Now the article is back, but the talk page is still locked down. Could you please unlock it so I can add project information (or delete the article?) Argento Surfer (talk) 13:36, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. I have unprotected the page.  The reason for the original protection is probably no longer relevant.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:38, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Question about the White House Chief Strategist article protection of August 23, 2016.
On 16:15, 23 August 2017‎, you made an edit on White House Chief Strategist to protect it from persistent disruptive editing, as shown in the revision history, but you probably forgot to add the code into the article that prevents unregistered users from editing the article until 20:15, 26 August 2017. Please give it a quick check. Thanks :) --M.W.B.A.B. (Click here to talk to me!) 21:18, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Also please send me a notification using the  parameter so that I could read your response, thanks! :D  --M.W.B.A.B. (Click here to talk to me!) 21:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, it looks like I forgot the protection template but the page is protected even without it - unregistered users have been unable to edit the page. The template just alerts others that the page is protected.  I'll add it now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:06, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * + Oops, sorry, I'm fairly new here and I didn't know it would be protected without the template, thanks for informing me about that though! -- --M.W.B.A.B. (Click here to talk to me!) 22:56, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Carbylamine-choline-chloride
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Carbylamine-choline-chloride. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Out of curiosity
The notice you left here seems to be a template notice, but I've never been able to figure out where they come from when they aren't just, and it seems to be slightly out of line with the second paragraph of WP:REALNAME, specifically the bit about If you have the same name as a well-known person to whom you are unrelated, and are using your real name, you should state clearly on your userpage that you are unrelated to the well-known person.

I can see homonymy being a rare enough phenomenon not to be specifically addressed in the block notice, but if that's the case then wouldn't it also be too rare to specifically address in the policy page?

Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 16:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That notice is the template Uw-ublock-famous which was substituted. For the standardized user talk page message templates, you can usually determine which template was substituted by a hidden comment (such as "" in my edit).  I'm not sure I understand your concern about the wording of that template, but please feel free to discuss it at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:30, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Ahmingo
Do you know what outlookxp have done to block different options in wiki? Hostile blocking is not fair for any editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.242.165.166 (talk) 23:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have concerns about the behavior of an editor on another languange wiki, you should address those concerns there. It is not acceptable to attack other editors on your user pages here.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:26, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Luke Shen-Tien Chi
Do not delete this meesage. Everyone has right to see the truth. Do not sent me another lengthy instruction and act like you care. Do not sent me another invitation to stir me away from this problem here.

This page contents are mostly delete. Because of discriminators that disapproval notably of Luke Shen-Tien Chi.

Chi should have been approval are breakdown into three major points: 1. A major book deal in China. Which the book is now published. 2. Major news coverage in China by interviews. And written a publish work in China's major TV channel 3. He created words are that in China dictionary. You did not improve anything for Luke Shen-Tien Chi. All you did is delete him. If you really want to help. Than fix it! Mike7682 (talk) 00:29, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I'm having trouble understanding what you are talking about. I deleted Draft:Luke Shen-Tien Chi because you blanked the page entirely and it therefore met criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD, "One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page").  I see that you have since recreated the page; however, if you did not intend to blank the article or did not wish to have it deleted, I can restore the deleted edits.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey Ed, Just being honest with you. I was quite upset at that moment. Because my hard work did not account for any approval. Everyone was pretty much determined to quietly remove any contents that I made. Without thoroughly looking over the news coverage in China to make final decision. Is very easy us to do a search and find nothing. But if look harder enough. You will definitely find something more. :-} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike7682 (talk • contribs) 06:28, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Mannose article
I think you were a little unfair in suggesting that the peer-reviewed World Journal of Urology was a primary source in the section on potential therapeutic use of Mannose. While I hate poor and pretend science, I've removed your NPSN tag. I have however added in extra commentary from the study authors from the associated BJUI journal saying that care must be taken in the conclusions drawn from the study.

I hope you're content with this approach.

Jpmaytum (talk) 15:18, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't really have an objection, but I think there is probably a better option. I commented at Talk:Mannose. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:19, 30 August 2017 (UTC)