User talk:Edgar181/Archive43

Perfluorocycloalkene‎
Do you think this specific topic is actually notable enough for an article? It looks like it's almost all by a single author citing his own work. Most of the non-WP:CRYSTAL of it seems like just applications of a wider topic such as "perfluorocarbon" (but not specifically that they are cyclic) or "fluoroalkene" (there does appear to be something interesting to say, but not specifically related to being cyclic or *per*fluoro). Fluorocarbons aren't my area of expertise though. DMacks (talk) 14:27, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Fluorocarbons aren't my area of expertise either, but perfluorocycloalkene‎s do seem to be a bit of a niche interest - at most a couple of scientific articles published on the topic per year. I think it could easily be trimmed and merged into a broader topic without losing anything of significance.  There's also a clear COI issue, as you've noted, with the article being the sole work of Babloosharma007 and half the references having Babloo Sharma as a coauthor.  I definitely wouldn't object if you merged the content elsewhere, or I may do so myself when I find the time.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:29, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Floquenbeam • Lectonar
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news
 * Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
 * The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration
 * A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Miscellaneous
 * A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

New editor creating IP userpage
Hey Ed, hope all is well. I was checking the edit filter log and it looks like was trying to create a user page for 188.39.121.210, which you blocked. Looks like it pass the duck test but I just wanted to bring it to your attention. --   LuK3      (Talk)   13:15, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I have now blocked this user for the block evasion, attempted vandalism, and inappropriate username.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:23, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Ibsharholdings
You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 09:33, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

RiroGames
Hey bro myself creator of RiroGames wikipedia page. Please get my page back and I promise that I will not remove any deletion request. RiroGames (talk) 15:30, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * This page about yourself is simply not appropriate for Wikipedia. See Notability (people) for details regarding the relevant guidelines.  Regards,  -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Transgender
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Transgender. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

block of 210.187.200.9
I'm not sure if you're aware of the discussion at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2405:3800:381:A66F:3CAA:F9AE:844C:FF38, but 's behaviour was block evasion. One IPV6 range and a V4 address have been blocked for this behaviour in the past. A block of 31 hours is probably insufficient. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:02, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * And Wan Kuzain is one of the articles the editor likes to go to so locking it takes away a key clue in finding our Malaysian friend. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Typically, people who use IP socks like this move on to new IPs fairly quickly, so a longer block is likely to make little difference. I would have put a longer block on a range if I could have discerned one, but based on the IPs reported at the SPI, I don't see anything workable in that regard.  If you are aware of any range that this individual commonly uses, please let me know and I'll try to range block.  Regarding Wan Kuzain, if you feel that unprotecting it would make things easier dealing with this issue, I'd be happy to unprotect it.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:49, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand. A range block might in order, but leaving that "signal" page may not be necessary now as he's been asked to play for the Malaysian under-23 team, so come December, may be a valid edit. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:10, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

UAA report
Sorry, I missed this when I was actioning the report. I think the block is correct though; they need a name that complies with policy and also to make any required disclosures about conflicts, etc. N.J.A.  &#124; talk  14:49, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I have no objection.  Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:50, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Your block of 2603:301b:1c81:0:9d87:a41c:fd6e:5a72
Seems to me that another rangeblock is in order, considering the edit history of Al Michaels over the past 16 days. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:40, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right. I hadn't noticed the history.  I have now blocked  for 3 months (was previously blocked for a month).  Thanks.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey, they hopped again. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:24, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I've now blocked that IP for a month and semi-protected Al Michaels.  Cris Collinsworth is currently protected with pending changes.  If the problem returns when the blocks and protections expire, or if the problem moves to different IPs and articles, please just let me or another admin know.  Regards,  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:49, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Caramboxin
Hi Edgar,

About this compound, it's said CAS #1531600-36-8, but this molecule is chiral, on the carbone with the amine. I think mainly with this link this CAS number is the one of the S-enantiomer. Could you, please, see all the chemical abstract say about this compound and its enantiomers. Thank you for your help --Titou (talk) 13:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The name "caramboxin" appears to refer specifically to the single enantiomer which is the (S)-isomer and has CAS #1531600-36-8. The other enantiomer and the compound with undefined stereochemistry do not yet have CAS numbers assigned to them.  I have updated the image File:Caramboxin.svg to show the correct stereochemistry and updated the infobox at caramboxin.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:36, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism
Vandalism Habibcricket (talk) 06:26, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ed, I have blocked the editor per NOTHERE, which here means a cocktail of a lack of competence, an unwillingness to learn, and foolish persistence. Drmies (talk) 02:37, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyviol on user sandbox
Hello Edgar181, could you please have a look at this sandbox page? I've found that parts of the content is copy pasted from this external website, and added the corresponding template (there and at the user talk page) but that user is insistigly removing the template and reinstating the (possibly) copyrighted content. How could I deal with this issue? --DoebLoggs (talk) 12:03, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Comparing the sandbox page and the listennotes.com page, I see some small parts that match and some content that might be considered paraphrasing, but I'm not sure that rises to the level of a copyright violation. This tool reports "Violation Unlikely". Perhaps you can list the page at Copyright problems where editors who are more knowledgeable about the details of Wikipedia's copyright policy can have a look.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:13, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. Regards, --DoebLoggs (talk) 12:15, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Wrong structure?
Hi! You didn't make either of these molecule structures, but seems correct to me whereas  seems incorrect. In (2), stereoisomerism of the ether oxygen connecting the tetrahydropyran to the rest of the molecule is of wrong chirality. The rest seems OK in both pictures. I'm not sure how to remove images from Wikimedia and wanted to check up on somebody before doing anything - you came to my mind first. 5-HT2AR (talk) 17:48, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * There are more. This is OK, but this is not when you think about the orientation of the hydrogen. 5-HT2AR (talk) 18:00, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I will take a look. Incorrect images should be replaced with a correct one, wherever they are used on Wikimedia projects.  The incorrect ones can then be nominated for deletion on Commons where they are hosted.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:08, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Checking with Chemical Abstracts, I believe you are correct that several of the images depict a wrong stereoisomer. I have now replaced all uses of File:Amphotericin B structure.svg and File:AmphotericinB.svg with File:Amphotericin_B_new.svg and marked the two incorrect ones with the template w:commons:template:disputed chem and they will be deleted after a month if they are not corrected.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:23, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I have also marked File:Amphotericin B.svg and File:Amphotericinum B.PNG as disputed for missing or ambiguous stereochemical information. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:28, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:17, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:31, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Barkeep49
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Beetstra • KillerChihuahua • Kusma
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Arcadian • Extraordinary Machine • Xeno
 * Pictogram voting rename.png JamesBWatson →

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Evad37

CheckUser changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Courcelles • SilkTork • Timotheus Canens

Oversight changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Courcelles • SilkTork • Timotheus Canens

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news
 * As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration
 * The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
 * The arbitration case regarding was closed.  While there will be a local RfC focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.

Miscellaneous
 * The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

always looking for CAS numbers
Hi,

To complete the fr page C8H18O, strangely I found the CAS numbers for S-(+)-octan-3-ol (#22658-92-0) but nothing for the corresponding enantiomer and for 4-octanol #589-62-8, I see it's chiral but can't found anything about the enantiomers. Could you help me, please? --Titou (talk) 17:50, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Here's what I found:
 * (±)-3-octanol: 589-98-0
 * (R)-(-)-3-octanol: 70492-66-9
 * (S)-(+)-3-octanol: 22658-92-0
 * (±)-4-octanol: 589-62-8
 * (R)-(+)-4-octanol: 61559-29-3
 * (S)-(-)-4-octanol: 90365-63-2
 * Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:02, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot --Titou (talk) 07:45, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Please block this ip!
43.239.79.194 has been randomly inserting nonsense into articles - he inserted random Hindi swear words into this article https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_traditional_Chinese_medicines&diff=prev&oldid=917953714

Mfernflower (talk) 19:40, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Even though this IP address hasn't edited in a week, there has been nothing but vandalism from this IP so I've blocked for a month. Regards,  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:00, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Question
This edit here [] has me a little concerned. Does this warrant contacting WP:EMERGENCY? CLCStudent (talk) 16:09, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Though WP:EMERGENCY says to report all threats, personally I would just ignore it as simple childishness. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Cool User Page

 * Thanks! -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:16, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks...
For managing to end the IP vandalism spree on Foodpanda. Took up a chunk of my morning trying to restore the article and keep it stable... James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 14:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all that work. I'm glad to help.  I'm sorry it took that long for an admin to come along and protect it.  :/  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem, I tried my best to find the last stable revision (best version was dated August) and keep it that way. After all, it's what anti-vandaism is all about! :3 James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs),

How to unblock my account?
How do I unblock my account, as I contributed and was told to create a new account? (User:HandsDigital) - 11 October 2019 — Preceding unsigned comment added by HandsDigital (talk • contribs) 13:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Now that you've created a new account that you can edit with, there is no reason to unblock the one with the disallowed username. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:58, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I assume you also operated the account, as you were editing about it. Please do not operate multiple accounts; this is called sockpuppetry and doing so will bring your Wikipedia editing days to a swift end.
 * Whatever account you create next, please ensure it conforms with Wikipedia's username policy, and in particular the rule against naming accounts after businesses.
 * Please also avoid creating articles about your business or its clients without first complying with our mandatory and non-negotiable paid editing disclosure policy. You should also review our rules about conflict of interest and look at FAQ/Organizations, if you haven't done so already. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:54, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

78.42.240.87
user:78.42.240.87 is abusing her talkpage. CLCStudent (talk) 14:38, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Talk page access revoked. Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:41, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Protect
Hi, can you protect User talk:Udo T., under constant vandalism? Thanks Denisarona (talk) 14:39, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. Regards,  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Denisarona (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:56, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 01:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It's hard to believe that is has been 14 years.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

 * Thank you! -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:18, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

TP abuse
You might want to have a look at TP access here as they are using it only to send apparently abusive messages to you. Cheers DBaK (talk) 11:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Talk page access revoked. Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:53, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I don't think they were here entirely to help ... cheers DBaK (talk) 11:54, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Report on vandalism
Special:Contributions/2600:1700:8D60:3390:DC19:2EA0:D05B:255B -- Thedarkknightli (talk) 14:25, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * In general, it's best to warn users for the first instances of vandalism. I've gone ahead and done so now.  If they persist after warnings, they can be reported to WP:AIV.  There's some additional advice for handling vandalism at Vandalism.  Regards,  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:28, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Got it. -- Thedarkknightli (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Petition !!!
there is a petition that is trying to get you banned from deleting peoples edits on Wikipedia 31 people so far have signed the petition.

it is on change.org if you want to have a look at it thanks for reading Boss 31 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boss 31 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Only 99969 more signatures to go and I will respond. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:28, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Leonas Prapuolenis
Hi, I have a question regarding deletion of the article https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leonas_Prapuolenis - why have you deleted it? It was corrected with the additional references. The redirection page was no longer necessary, but not the article itself IMHO. This is the message I've got on my Talk page from OxonAlex:
 * "Ke an, It looks fine to go into article space. I've added a tag to the Leonas Prapuolenis to ask for a page mover or admin to move the draft back into mainspace, as there is still a redirect to the draft holding up the move. OxonAlex - talk 10:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)" -- Ke an (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I deleted Leonas_Prapuolenis because at the time it was a redirect from article space to draft space. It was essentially housekeeping (speedy deletion criteria WP:CSD).  My deletion of the redirect should not be considered a comment on the suitability of the draft.  You are free to move the draft back into mainspace.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

improbable CAS numbers
Hi, it's about 4-Méthyltritriacontane CAS#149037-52-5, who is chiral and then had two enantiomers : have they CAS number? Could you find them, please ? and if they exist then could you see the french page C34H70 to complete it, please ? leaving beside, perhaps, the 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17-hexadécaméthyloctadécane which had 14 asymetric carbons and a mirror plan and then many, many enantiomers pairs and meso compounds, I don't know how much, really --Titou (talk) 12:41, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * (4R)-4-méthyltritriacontane
 * (4S)-4-méthyltritriacontane
 * There are no assigned CAS numbers for any of the enantiomers of 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-methyltritriacontane, only for the racemates. There is no CAS number for any isomer of hexadecamethyloctadecane. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:00, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Socks
Hi... you just blocked, but there appears to be an older account (stale) that is a likely sockmaster -. Another likely sock, was already blocked a few months ago for promotional editing. There appears to be the users and  active on de-wiki. Should I file something at SPI or is it not worth it? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:54, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's worth filing an SPI. I have blocked the accounts that have been active here.  I'll add COI tags to the page.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:58, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually the whole article is garbage. I'm just going to nominate it as A7. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:20, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

WMF Women's World Cup
Please delete, for some reasons it's not being displayed in CAT:R2. -- CptViraj (📧) 12:03, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. I don't see why it didn't show up in the category.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:05, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * . It's happening with many maintenance cats. -- CptViraj (📧) 12:06, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
Hi, seems to be an obvious sockpuppet of    who you blocked as they are editing the same articles and removing the same large chunks of content with no edit summary, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 18:58, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Mole Day!
 Happy Mole Day 6.022x1023  Hello! Wishing you a Happy Mole Day on the behalf of WikiProject Science.


 * What is this?
 * Mole Day is an unofficial holiday celebrated among chemists, chemistry students and chemistry enthusiasts on October 23, between 6:02 a.m. and 6:02 p.m. This date is derived from the Avogadro number, which is approximately 6.022×1023, and the day is named after scientist Amedeo Avogadro.


 * What you can do!


 * Participate in our and our sister WikiProjects
 * Expand articles listed here
 * Improve science articles
 * Sign the guestbook or place User WikiProject Science on your user page.
 * Add this page to your watchlist to see what's occurring here


 * Similar events


 * Pi day
 * DNA day
 * Evolution Day
 * Yuri's Night
 * Square Root Day


 * See also


 * Observances about science
 * Observances in October

- Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe/Unsubscribe -

Sent by on behalf of WikiProject Science and its related projects. Wikiproject Science

Wikiproject Chemistry

Wikiproject Physics

WikiProject History of Science Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

still more improbable CAS number
Hi,

I can't find a CAS number for tortuosamine! is it exist? --Titou (talk) 17:51, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Here is what I found at Chemical Abstracts:
 * 35722-04-4 (R)-(-)-tortuosamine
 * 51934-13-5 (S)-(+)-tortuosamine
 * 79517-20-7 (±)-tortuosamine
 * I notice that this is inconsistent with Pubchem which lists (-)-tortuosamine as the (S)-isomer. I don't know which is correct.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:28, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, thanks a lot. It seems PubChem is totally wrong, see the name it gives :
 * 2 -[(6S)-6-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-7,8-dihydro-5H-quinolin-6-yl]-N-methylethanamine
 * while on the article and ChemSketch give :
 * 2-[(6S)-6-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-5,6,7,8-tetrahydroquinolin-6-yl]-N-methylethanamine
 * On the structure, we can see quinoline is tetrahydro ! --Titou (talk) 10:31, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Chemical Abstracts is much better curated than PubChem. It looks like ignoring PubChem in this case is best.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:52, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay I found here the optical rotation of R-form is -29° then no more doubt. In Tortuosamine, I don't put the PubChem CID and explain the prob on the talk page. I write to PubChem about this two probs and they answer :
 * First, the name (-)-Tortuosamine was provided to us as a synonym by a submitter - as indicated in the "Synonyms" section at the top and in the "Depositor-Supplied Synonyms" section (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/443745#section=Depositor-Supplied-Synonyms.
 * Clicking on the hyperlinked name in the second section takes you to the PubChem Substance records with the information provided from submitters, in this case 5 different groups. Unfortunately we cannot change the synonym - as it was provided by them.  However, we do recommend that if you believe their data to be inaccurate - that you should contact them and ask them to review their information. Once they let us know that they are updating their PubChem Substance records - we can then change what is shown on the PubChem Compound record.


 * Now, the information provided on the PubChem Compound record is an aggregate of data base on the 2D structure shown on the record.  All Structures, Computed descriptors (IUPAC, InChI, SMILES) are based on the structure itself.  We then aggregate all information based on PubChem Substance records and other sources (USPTO/WPO, ChEBI) for example and display them on the record.


 * The name of the record at the top of the page is based on a ranked algorithm including MeSH, ChemIDPlus, ChEBI and other trusted sources. We are currently working on improving this algorithm.  However in this case the 2D structure has been matched specifically with the term "(-)-tortuosamine" by ChEBI.  If you believe they are in error (as mentioned above - and they are one of our submitters: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/substance/92740999), please contact them to ask them to review their assignment of the synonym with the particular structure.  Once they let us know that they are updating their PubChem Substance records - we can then change what is shown on the PubChem Compound record.
 * So they just walk away then me too ! --Titou (talk) 18:22, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I have contacted PubChem in the past about errors in their database too. I have gotten essentially the same answer as you did:  "Not our problem". -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:26, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Halloween Kills
I would respectfully ask you to take another look at this. Most of the additional input is from IPs or editors with very little edit counts (is that right grammatically?). The 6 or 7 edits by established editors are all minor (sp, or adding a ref). Onel 5969  TT me 00:50, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * With 6 or 7 edits from established editors to improve the article, that implies the page is appropriate for Wikipedia. Is there any content in the article that you think doesn't belong on Wikipedia? -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, my position is since those 6 or 7 edits were all very minor, from editors who most likely didn't know that this was the creation of a blocked editor, I would say the entire article doesn't belong on WP. I know that deleting these types of articles is discretionary, but if articles like this don't get deleted, all it does is encourage other socks to do the same thing. But that's just my opinion. I literally come across no less than half a dozen of these a day.  Onel 5969  TT me 21:43, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I can understand your concern about encouraging socks, but for an article that has been around for months, has plenty of edits from non-sock editors, and was moved from draft to article space by an experienced AFC reviewer, I don't think speedy deletion is the appropriate course. I think most admins wouldn not speedy delete an article under these circumstances.  If this is something that you feel strongly about, perhaps you can start a discussion to get input from other editors (Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion, WP:AN, etc.).  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:39, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your explanations.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:34, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Dppc
Can you stop deleting images that are totally fine? You are just bothering. Thank you BQUB19-MChaves (talk) 18:26, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not "totally fine". File:3D dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine.gif is an inaccurate representation of the chemical structure of dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine.  Please do not reintroduce it into the article.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:28, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

DPPC pt. 2
Hi, we are a group of medical students, and this is a punctuable biochemistry project. We had to add information to a Wikipedia topic, and also we had to create an original image of the topic. So we took a 3D representation of DPPC and we recreated it with our tools. The expire date of this project is en withini 3 hours, and if we don't have an original image, it won't be valid. So we won't be evaluated. Our biochemistry professor told us the image was quite accurated, so we believe that the representation is fine. Even though, we praise you not to take down the 3D image at least for a few weeks, so we can be rightly evaluated by our professors (and they can finally decide if the representation is viable). We would be very grateful if you could leave it the way it was, it is a really important project to us that could determine our final grade. So, please we sincerely beg you to let us leave the image in the article. Thanks for your understanding.BQUB19-LCasas (talk) 19:03, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The needs of your class project do not outweigh Wikipedia's policies. However, since I do not think it is fair that your professor is making such demands of you, I will refrain from editing the article for the next 3 hours. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, we've read your correction about the image. We've extracte the shape in 3D from a web page that shows what a 3D biomolecule looks like. As the evaluation can take weeks, if we specify that the image corresponds to the 2D structure of the DPPC, would you consider it correct? If we based on the 2D representation found in the wikipedia our structure would be identical so it would not be incorrect then. We know that you are doing your job, but we would appreciate it if you would let us hang the image with the necessary specifications for the information to be correct. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BQUB19 Centelles (talk • contribs) 19:28, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Sylvia Plath
Hi, if you have time can you protect the above article from unexplained deletions? Thanks Denisarona (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:57, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Yahwism (disambiguation)
Hi Edgar181, you deleted Yahwism (disambiguation) as an unnecessary disambiguation page. However the disambiguation page is at Yahwism; Yahwism (disambiguation) is a redirect. If Yahwism exists, shouldn't Yahwism (disambiguation) exist also? I don't have any strong feelings about the existence of Yahwism (it seems a bit iffy to me), but in cleaning up the disambiguation page Jehovist, Yahwism is listed in the See also section. It should go through the redirect, but that's currently a red link. Should I recreate the redirect, or do you want to delete Yahwism? Leschnei (talk) 12:21, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * At the time I deleted Yahwism (disambiguation) it was a redirect to Yahwism, which was not a disambiguation page. Now that Yahwism has been converted into a disambiguation page, the restoration of the redirect at Yahwism (disambiguation) is appropriate. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:25, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Except now it has been returned to non-disambiguation page status. I think I'll just walk away quietly and let others who know something about the topic have it out. Thanks for your reply. Leschnei (talk) 22:57, 30 October 2019 (UTC)