User talk:Edgar181/Archive7

Thanks for the star
I really appreciate it. Karl Hahn (T) (C) 21:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year
Thank you very much. Happy new year to you, too.-- Ed (Edgar181) 12:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Merging the history needed?
Hi Ed. There has been a cut and paste move here and here and a discussion on copyvio from another website afterwards. I have stated my opinion there, but the history might have to be fixed by an admin. In case you agree, can you do that for me please? Thanks. --Leyo 18:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it looks like merging the histories of the two articles is the appropriate thing to do here. I'll take care of it.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. --Leyo 19:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks!
for reverting that unnecessary edit on my talkpage =) happy new year buddy! †B lo o d p ac k†  05:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Ganoderic acid
Is there any possibility you have the reference materials to make a diagram for Ganoderic acid? Badagnani (talk) 07:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, done. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Your talk page archives
Hiya,

Just a quickie - I've noticed (as there's a back-link to my userpage) that your talk pages are archived at User:Edgar181/Archive1 (etc.) rather than User_talk:Edgar181/Archive1. I appreciate that the guidance at Help:Archiving_a_talk_page isn't necessarily binding, but I just wondered if you had a particular reason? I wonder if there's the potential that it might create confusion? Thanks, and apologies if I'm sticking my nose in! Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 15:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there's no particular reason I did it that way and moving them to talk pages might be a bit less confusing. Next time I archive, I'll move them.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

(Belated) Happy New Year! spam
Thank you very much. And happy new year to you, too! -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Captianchase
Hi, could I please get a block for, consistent vandalism as almost all edits, and vandalised despite last warning. Cheers! +Hexagon1 (t) 16:34, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have temporarily blocked him. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. +Hexagon1 (t) 16:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Delete Tag
Please do not remove speedy delete tags. You may contest the article, or since your an admin, you may place a clean-up tag on the page. Follow the rules!!! Dustihowe  Talk 19:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Inappropriate speedy deletion tags can be removed. An admin can decline to speedy delete.  Also, please see WP:DTTR - it's common etiquette.  Thanks.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not using db-g3, I am using db-nonsense and all of the pages that I am tagging fall under the criteria. They either have little or no information on the page or cannot be useful to Wikipedia.
 * Sorry, that was a typo. db-nonsense is not for articles that have little information or may not be useful to Wikipedia.  Please read WP:CSD. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks, Edgar, for attempting to stop the serial vandal, MickHunt. That individual appears obsessed with one page on Wikipedia. Isn't it interesting "Mickhunt" isn't doing more editing - just stalking one page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petition (talk • contribs) 21:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Mick Hunt vandalizing page
Dear Edgar,

Please note that 7 minutes after you warned Mick Hunt not to edit he did it again -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Viglione —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petition (talk • contribs) 21:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I was trying to be patient with him and avoid blocking him. But he persisted and he's been blocked by Nick.  Thanks for your help.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Unreasonable deletion of site in progress
I am the creator of the Hemoglobin (Religion) site, and I am unable to understand the motives behind deletion of it. I am just trying to inform others on the religion that I have lived my life by, and I think it is wrong for you to delete it under the grounds of lacking fact-proving third party sources. I am trying to create a fact-proving source on Wikipedia that you have unfortunately put a halt to. I think you are prejudicial against a Hemoglobism when your peers allow Christianity and Judaism yet delete my beliefs 30 seconds after a flag by a pagan. So if you could please reply with a reasonable response that will help me understand this detrimental erasure.

UN - Jooms1060 Email - Jooms1060@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jooms1060 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Please see Notability. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

How can you delete my religion for not having a "third party fact-proving source," when you allow Christianity. It only has a bible and the "ideas" and "stories" of others. The bible never proved anything. It just wrote a couple made up stories from some old, lonely, drunks that were at the end of their pitiful life and decided to try to become famous. Sounds a lot like the southern "rednecks" that say they saw a UFO. I am not saying Christianity is wrong. I am simply stating that Hemoglobism should have a chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jooms1060 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of replaced chemical structures that do not comply with the guidelines on Commons
Hi Ed. As you are one of the most frequently uploaders of chemical structures, you might give a comment here (see also here). Thanks. --Leyo 23:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll take a look. Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 02:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandal killing
That was fast! Thanks!! Aleta (Sing)  18:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Any time...-- Ed (Edgar181) 18:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

68.225.89.222
Thanks for your prompt 7-day block of 68.225.89.222 (as seen from the history of the Administrator intervention against vandalism page). However, his talk page does not seem to have a notice reflecting that. Thanks, Mlouns (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I seemed to have missed that one. I've added the block notice now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Cmgoogin
Howdy, if you didn't notice, I strongly suspect that Special:Contributions/Esserpj19 is the same user as Special:Contributions/Cmgoogin. Same MO, same site.&mdash;Mrand T-C 21:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're certainly right. I've blocked the other account too.  Thanks for letting me know.  If he persists, I'll have the domain blacklisted.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem.&mdash;Mrand T-C 21:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Question
Hi Ed, I noticed you'd blocked user:Esserpj19, whom I'd been watching, so I wanted to pose a question. IP: 59.145.90.14 has been inserting links to various “tamil.galatta.com” sites into dozens of articles. The links are often (if not always) added in the lead section as citations to the bolded article subject; this bizarre and unnecessary referencing, not to mention the volume of edits over a short time period, suggest something is amiss. The user hasn't yet gone through the gambit of warning templates, so would it still be acceptable to make a report to AIV? Alternatively, am I incorrect in suspecting spam/vandalism? Ɛƚ ƈơƅƅ  ơƚɑ  talk 22:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It does look a little suspicious to me. I'd recommend that you bring it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam.  There are probably people there that would have more experience than me dealing with this kind of thing. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

blocked ip address
i see that you have blocked the ip adress 70.91.131.209. i was curious as to why. could you please enlighten me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwilley202 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That IP address has been repeatedly blocked from editing due to persistent vandalism. You can click on the "contribs" and "block log" links here for details:
 * -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Natural Gas
Hi Ed, I had noticed that something went wrong, and was just about to correct it myself when you got in first - thanks. I was reverting using Twinkle, and it usually works well, but occasionally strange things have happened before. I think I'll blame Twinkle. Best regards -Zamphuor (talk) 14:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like you've got it handled, thanks. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Joe Viglione
Hi Edgar,

Thanks for your help last week with the situation with Mick Hunt (see above). It appears on the 15th they started the vandalism again which we discussed 22:07, 7 January 2008

If you need "reliable" and "sources" re: Wikipedia:Notability, there are plenty available. Please advise.
 * Thanks for adding the external link that you did. What the article could really use, though, is a source (independent of the subject) about the subject himself.  Without something like that, it's possible that it not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:13, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

There are writers from around the world who have written profiles, Takashi Okutaki from Japan, Robert Francos in New York and others. Here's a Boston Globe piece

Boston Globe Landing big names By Diana Brown |  February 1, 2004 http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/02/01/landing_big_names/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petition (talk • contribs) 15:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Great. Please add it to the article, and that's enough to satisfy notability guidelines in my opinion.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ovalene
Hi. Just a quick check. It seems as the structure for ovalene on page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovalene might be wrong (?), because according to for example http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?Name=Ovalene the middle rings should be aromatic also. Sorry if this is a mistake on my part. Regards! —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoNo67 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The two images actually represent the same chemical structure. The difference between the two images is just a difference in representation - in one, aromaticity in all the rings (including the middle rings) is implied by alternating double and single bonds, and in the other image aromaticity is explicitly denoted with the circles.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Now I see! Sorry! I realize now I should have counted the bonds around the central carbons! Sorry to have wasted your time! Please delete this "Ovalene" section if you'd like to save space in your user talk page! Thanks for your quick reply! —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoNo67 (talk • contribs) 14:10, January 17, 2008
 * No, it's not a waste of time at all. I don't mind one bit being asked questions like this.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Recent block of 66.114.4.94
Dear Edgar181, Thanks for your recent block of 66.114.4.94. However, I think you forgot to put a block notice in his talk page. Thanks, Mlouns (talk) 17:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, done now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Trimagnesium Citrate
Thanks for the fixes! --Slashme (talk) 05:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Hey -- just wanted to say thanks for reverting the vandalism at my talk page! :-) Zodiiak (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Sodium ferrocyanide
Hi, could you add a diagram for Sodium ferrocyanide? Badagnani (talk) 20:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I have added it now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

IUPAC nomenclature illustrations
Sure! I just corrected Image:IUPAC-alkane-5.svg—the numbering was incorrect—, which was the last "snag". Feel free to replace them. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, done now. Thanks again for creating (and correcting!) those images. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

UNCLAS//N05239//DATA BASE TRANSMISSION AND PROTECTION//VANDALISM (REVISION)
Dr. Edgar 181:

1.  MY IP:  214.13.128.180

2. I am a U.S. Marine in Iraq on a "six-month" tour. I have been here 22 months straight. I am tired and have little free time, I work seven-days-a-week. I had some free time, and decided to do some research on my dead grandfather's PURE OIL COMPANY gas station in Moundville, Alabama from the 1950's/60's. Imagine my surprise when I hit that link on Wikipedia and found that I was blocked for whatever reason, in this case, VANDALISM. I sometimes use Wikipedia for a quick overview of things, have never contributed or edited ANY article previously, mcuh less on PURE OIL COMPANY, but somehow you have seen fit to BLOCK ME" for VANDALISM, siting IP address 214.13.130.100, and block me until 28 Jan 08, see notice below:         Permission error         From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia         Jump to: navigation, search            •	secure login         You are currently unable to edit Wikipedia pages.         You can still read pages, but cannot edit, change, or create them.         Editing from 214.13.130.100 (your account, IP address, or IP address range) has been disabled by Edgar181 for the following reason(s):

Vandalism See our blocking policy for additional information. Your IP address is 214.13.130.100, and the block has been set to expire: 15:04, 28 January 2008.

3. I have not interest in editing an article on PURE OIL COMPANY, and if I did contribute to or edit any article, it would not be on petroleum products, chemical products and all of those things you have your PhD in. My forte in military and history and combat and have yet to contribute or edit any of those articles either. But if I wanted to, I could not, because I am blocked.

4. In pursuit of this, I have now registered with Wikipedia and have a confirmed email address. I have no reason to VANDALIZE the page on the defunct PURE OIL COMPANY, nor any other article on any page for that matter. I would like you to get me "unblocked" post-haste so I do not have to waste any more of my very limited, valuable-to-me-if-not-to-you free time between missions researching the defunct PURE OIL COMPANY so I might have some information on my grandfather's filling station to send my mother with the PURE OIL COMPANY products I have successfully bid on on ebay (which I am not "blocked" from for "vandalism" with, and, where my reputation, by IP, user name, or full name is intact.

5. I have further checked the Wikipedia list of blocked users, and neither my specific IP address of 214.13.128.180, or the IP address of 214.13.130.100 is blocked, and neither is my username of Ironmajor.

6. I have checked with the local IMO, WAN and Help Desk personnel, and they have told me that we have internal IPs assigned to our computers, and when going external, we are assigned a different IP going out, and they are randomly assigned as needed. The next time I come up on Wikipedia, my external IP will be different because it comes from a SERIES of assigned IPs. I can explain the rest of that off line since I do not want to publish that for all to see. If someone vandalized an article on PURE OIL COMPANY, it came from someone in the external IP series which do NOT correspond to a specific, individual user here. Therefore, blocking anyone from that series blocks an entire group of people for the misdeeds of one.

6. If you have any questions, I can be reached at.

7. Thankyou for your prompt attention to correct this error.

R. S. Rayfield, Jr. Major, U.S. Marines Iraq


 * The IP address 214.13.128.180 has never been blocked from editing.  The IP address 214.13.130.100 has been blocked several times by different administrators, including most recently by me, because of repeated vandalism from anonymous editors using that IP address.  Each block was well within Wikipedia policy, and serves to protect Wikipedia from vandalism.  For institutions that use a proxy to carry the internet traffic for many users, the unavoidable result is that one bad editor can cause many others to lose their ability to anonymously edit Wikipedia.  However, in each case, only anonymous editing was blocked and registered users have still been able to edit from that IP address.  Since the most recent block was about to expire anyway, I have just gone ahead and removed it.  However, it is likely to be blocked again if the vandalism continues.  Signing up for an account as you have avoids all the problems.  Happy editing.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.
I appreciate your quick blocking the vandal. The anon did seem to provoke me to engage in edit warring, but with your help, the article goes back to the right status. --Appletrees (talk) 16:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

204.171.51.165
Isn't a three month block a bit much for only one vandalism edit today? Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 14:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It was really the history of vandalism and prior blocks for it, rather than today's edit, that determined the block I gave. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the explanation. Cheers again, Kingturtle (talk) 15:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!! from Ano-User
Edgar, thanks for adding info to the Testolactone article I started to create!!!

User:Ano-User —Preceding comment was added at 19:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:02, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Another block?
Hi Edgar: You recently blocked User:67.43.76.7 (see User_talk:67.43.76.7) for vandalism. He/she is at it again&mdash;once again on the Bald Eagle article. Any chance for another block? MeegsC | Talk 22:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked the IP again. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! MeegsC | Talk 09:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi. Thanks for the net block to 163.153.126.0/23. --NERIC-Security (talk) 17:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

4-methylmethcathinone
Hi Edgar. I notice that you proposed the page for this compound for deletion. I agree that this compound does not meet the official guidelines for notability, however it has been widely sold and used as a semi-legal "designer drug" and since this presents a significant public health concern I feel that it should not be deleted at this stage. Notability for designer drugs is a problematic issue, as there are a large number of compounds which have been definitively identified by laboratory analysis and are known to be current drugs of abuse, but because they are too new to have been mentioned in the scientific literature they fail the notability test if it is applied strictly. While I would not argue that every single one of these compounds necessarily merits its own wikipedia page, 4-methylmethcathinone has been sold internationally, to the general public, in quantities of hundreds if not thousands of dosage units, and so in this respect has seen a wider degree of recreational use than many of the older designer drugs which are deemed to be notable simply because they have at some stage attracted the attention of a researcher and been mentioned in a journal article about emerging drugs of abuse. If 4-methylmethcathinone fades back into obscurity in a year or so without ever having been mentioned in such a journal article, then I would agree that maybe it is not notable enough to have its own page, but at this stage I feel that deleting the page would be premature. Further discussion has been placed on the talk page for this drug. Meodipt (talk) 02:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. The issue that I have with the article is really about verifiability, not notability.  Without any kind of reliable source stating that it is in fact sold internationally to the general public as a recreational drug or that it has become a drug-enforcement issue, Wikipedia guidelines suggest that we shouldn't have an article on it.  Thanks for removing the unsourced additions, though; I think the article is better without them for now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your concerns and will ensure that either the article gets suitable references added once they are available, or if this doesn't happen and the compound turns out to be an insignificant blip in the history of designer drugs then the article may well be suitable for deletion at a later stage. However I'm pretty sure that there will be reliable sources available at some stage, because apparantly the Israeli government has moved to make this compound illegal, and since they don't have an Analogues Act or equivalent this would imply that 4-methylmethcathinone will have been listed specifically on their controlled drug schedules. Unfortunately the Israeli Dangerous Drugs Act 1973 does not appear to be available online so I have not been able to confirm this. Also I would note that one of the researchers from the team who identified this compound is Dr David Caldicott who is certainly a reputable figure in the field, and I would expect that he will publish something on this research once they have finished it. Reporting their preliminary test results on that Russian drug users chat board was merely intended as an interim harm reduction measure to inform users of what is actually in the pills they have been taking! Meodipt (talk) 23:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Based on what you have said, I'm comfortable with the article as it stands. When I saw the Russian chat board post, I was intrigued to see something of that quality "published" in that forum.  Thanks for filling me in on the story, and for the thorough reply.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Editing image/chemical structure
Hi Edgar181, i'm new here and would like to point out that the image/structure you have posted for N-ethylmaleimide at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-Ethylmaleimide is incorrect in that it is missing a double bond. I would like to edit it (or replace it with my own image), but i'm not sure how. Can you please tell me how or point me to the right place for information on replacing an image? Thanks. --zark (talk) 21:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right, I did miss a double bond. Thanks for catching the error.  I have now fixed the image.  If you would like to learn more about creating chemical structure images for Wikipedia, you can take a look at WikiProject Chemistry/Structure drawing.  Or for more general information  about uploading images, see Help:Images and other uploaded files.  If you have specific questions, please just let me know and I'll help you out however I can.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Appreciate it. --zark (talk) 22:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Indef block of Soniic93
I was wondering if you would reconsider the indef block of Soniic93. As the user had received no formal warnings prior tomine, and considering that they have a total of four edits, I think the person deserves another chance. thoughts? - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  19:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There have been a number of times I've been asked to unblock a vandal with the hope that he will reform. Every single time, I've had to reblock because the vandalism continued.  I'm still hoping for that first time that it turns out well, so he's now unblocked.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I know, as I've been burned as well. I am thinking htat this protects you as well. Blocking a newbie without prior warning hurts your if someone really wants to pitch a fit. If he fucks up again, I will eat popcorn and watch and clap as you boot him to mars. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  20:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you :-)
- :-) Scarian Call me Pat  21:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Balasorecity
Thanks for taking care of this joker, it's always nice to see decicive action taken against a spam-only account like that. Keep up the good work! Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 10:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

User_talk:139.184.30.132
Hi Ed, you blocked this IP a while back; there's been a whole new spate of attacks on various articles from the same IP: would you be able to block again? ColdmachineTalk 16:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I blocked anonymous editing for a bit longer. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! ColdmachineTalk 18:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Lometopane / Iometopane
Hi Edgar

Would you mind renaming the page "Lometopane" to "Iometopane" as this is the correct name for the compound. I'm not sure how to rename pages and last time when I moved CFT to a new page name by just copying and pasting it, I was told off for wiping the edit history! Meodipt (talk) 00:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Renaming an article is properly done by using the "move" function. When I first started here, I got reprimanded for doing a cut-and-paste too (which seems like a perfectly logical thing to do until you get the hang of the importance of maintaining an edit history).  Anyway, there are details at Help:Moving a page.  But I'm not sure the article should be moved to iometopane, though, because that name only applies to the drug when radiolabled with iodine-123.  I think it should be named either (-)-2β-Carbomethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl)tropane or perhaps β-CIT or beta-CIT.  And wherever it ends up, we can create plently of redirects from iometopane and any alternate spellings/capitalizations as necessary.  What do you think?  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Good point. Personally I would favour (-)-2β-Carbomethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl)tropane as it is the most correct and unambiguous name for the compound, and anyone who is interested in these compounds will probably be familiar with the full chemical name. That was how I named CFT originally but people complained that I should have used the common name, so when I made a page for CPT I called it Troparil as that name is listed on the PubChem database, and looks like I misread Iometopane as Lometopane when I was making the page for CIT. Meodipt (talk) 13:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I favor the same name, so I've moved it there and I created a couple of redirects. If others prefer a different name, we can all discuss it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Akuammine
I also just made a page about this interesting compound, another novel opioid natural product, from a tree in Ghana. But the page won't add the references and categorisation sections to the bottom, I can't work out what I did wrong. Any ideas? Meodipt (talk) 13:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. It just needed /ref instead of ref in the tag. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Question
Rumsford baking powder contains calcium acid phosphate. I think we need an article on this--or do we already, under a similar name (and, thus, need a disambiguation)? Badagnani (talk) 05:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Is it Calcium dihydrogen phosphate? Badagnani (talk) 05:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes it is, so I've created the redirect. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Diagrams needed

 * 1) Calcium phosphate
 * 2) Calcium dihydrogen phosphate
 * 3) Calcium hydrogen phosphate
 * 4) Tricalcium phosphate

Badagnani (talk) 05:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I've created images and infoboxes for each. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

the cracks in my skin
Why did you delete the cracks in my skin page about the play in the Royal Extange???????????? ummmm............ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 04abarron (talk • contribs) 11:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The article was marked for speedy deletion by another editor because it appeared as blatant advertising (see WP:CSD). This was probably because it was lifted word-for-word from promotional material for the play, which is also against Wikipedia's rules because it is a violation of copyright.  If you think you can write a neutral article about the play, and you think the play meets Wikipedia's notability requirements (see WP:N) then it may be kept.  Hope this helps.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

may i ask...
May I just ask if wikipedia is actually a relaiable (sorry cant spell) source?Alexoxo (talk) 14:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not an easy question to answer. It depends on the article and it depends on what you mean by reliable.  You may find some useful information at Schools' FAQ.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

so
so what do you do as a hobby?Alexoxo (talk) 14:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to answer questions about Wikipedia, but if you're just interested in chatting with strangers there are other, better places for that. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

GBL Img
Why did you change the SVG to PNG on Gamma-Butyrolactone? SVG is preferred. Miserlou (talk) 05:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * SVG is not necessarily preferred. This is especially true when the SVG shows the wrong chemical structure.  The image someone added to gamma-butyrolactone is not gamma-butyrolactone.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Hydroxytyrosol
Hello Edgar,

as you can see the Reference links about Hydroxytyrosol are all correct,

this is not advertisement. (lot of work to write it)

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergiofmoya (talk • contribs) 12:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * In the references section of an article only references that were used to support statements made in the article should be listed. I have moved the references you have added to the talk page where they are available for others to use to expand the article.   They haven't been deleted, just moved, so your hard work is not lost.  When you are reverting me, you are also damaging the article by removing positive changes that I recently made.  So I'm going to undue your changes again.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for reverting those edits on my user page. It's appreciated! :) Loganberry (Talk) 16:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thanks
Sure! Anytime! Glad to help. These vandals....! - Milk's  Favorite  Cookie  00:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

WTB is famous why did u delete
You recently deleted the What the Buck page... What the Buck is a celebrity. If he doesnt get a page neither should lisanova or williamsledd... he is even on the youtube celebrities page... you deleted it cuz u said he was a non notable or infamous person... he is a celebrity and has more subscribers than either of the two above... plz restore page... he is an actuall celeb... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolcanadiandude (talk • contribs) 00:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I deleted it because it didn't really make a claim to notability, but I've undeleted it to give you a chance to add some more to the article. If you think you can write an article that establishes notability according to WP:N, please go ahead.  But internet celebrities tend to be on the edge of notability in Wikipedia's eyes, so it may end up getting deleted anyway.  Hope this helps.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Clown's Wine Bar and Jester's Nightclub
Hi, You recently deleted this page under the grounds of not explaining why it was notable. However, perhaps I did not put in across clearly enough in the initial creation of the page, that this is where all of the students from Southampton University go on a night out. It 9is also interesting to note, that our Student Union has a page, without and the club associated with this is nowhere near as popular. One thing that I did forget to mention, was also that Jester's was voted the third worst nightclub in the country, and since then, both of the two which were worse have either burnt down or been closed, and consequently this gives Clown's and Jester's some notability, even if it is through infamy.

So I thank you for your imput, but feel that it was inappropriate, however, this may be possibly due to the poor creation of the article, and I look forward to hearing your imput on this.

--Aurorajoy42 (talk) 13:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I still think it doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. If it is important to student life at the University (...and seems to have little notability otherwise), it would probably be best to incorporate info about the nightclub into the article about the university.  That seems like the reasonable course of action here. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Ln of x
, who you blocked just recently, is in fact. I've reblocked with a note to that effect. --Yamla (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. (Six months of the same lame vandalism?  You'd think people might have something better to do...)   -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

193.164.126.11
Thanks for blocking this IP user hopefully they will behave after the block has expired--Lerdthenerd (talk) 14:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

User:GGHHAAUUNNLLEETT
I noticed that you had blocked editing of the above user's talk page when I went there to place a warning - which is fine; but I happened to look on the User page itself and found that a User:Jack O Lantern has placed a sockpuppet tag there. I followed the link and found no such finding against this user account. Not sure what to do about this. Thought since you'd actioned the earlier block (and since I'm not an admin, so my options are limited) you might have some idea what to do. Thanks.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 19:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, that was User:Jack O Lanturn, with a "u" in Lanturn.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 20:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I blocked the editor for obvious trolling, then deleted and protected the user talk page because he persisted in trolling on that page. Looking at the sockpuppet allegations now, I see that GGHHAAUUNNLLEETT's edits were very obviously the same as the other sockpuppets, but it hasn't been confirmed by checkuser.  The checkuser said basically not to bother asking for checkuser anymore and just block any obvious sockpuppets.  So unless you want to change the notice from proven sockpuppet to suspected sockpuppet, I'd recommend just ignoring (per WP:RBI) at this point.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Maggie Hill
I'd like to know why you deleted the article "Maggie Hill". I put the template "under construction" at the top while writing the content offline. I'm going to recreate this page and I need you to not delete it while I'm working on it. Maggie is an author who's first book is coming out this summer/fall. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caseywurzbach (talk • contribs) 19:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I realize that there was an "under construction" template, but that is generally for articles that are actively being updated. In this case there was no content, and there had been no edits in days.  It's not unusual for people to attempt to start an article and then never return - I've deleted dozens of articles like this.  Please feel free to create the article if you think the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion (you can see Notability (people) for details).  However, if Maggie Hill is an author that has not yet published her first book, the article may not meet this criteria and may not be kept. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your help on George Stamatis
The crazy thing is, I would actually work with people to try to improve this article, but this user has no interest in that. I am walking away for now and will try to improve this article again later. Thank you. --70.109.223.188 (talk) 15:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy on Spacedaily.com
Heyo. I saw that you declined speedy on Spacedaily.com; I see why you would do that, but I thought you should know that most of the 300 links you mentioned were put here by linkspammers, and should be removed from EL sections soon, which should thin their numbers. Cheers, &#10154; Hi DrNick ! 23:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I did look through a few links randomly, and each was used as a reference.  But, I agree, if there's been linkspamming, inappropriate links should certainly be removed.  Feel free to use proposed deletion or AFD for the article if you see fit, too. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Acetaldehyde
I would like the old picture with the H! I know it is more cosequent without, but for didactic reasons H might be better.-Stone (talk) 08:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you mean you would prefer this one: [[Image:Acetaldehyde-skeletal.svg|50px]] then I don't mind if you want to switch it. I have a slight preference for aldehydes depicted without the explicit H, but either way is acceptable to me. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The other picture was marked speedy deletion, and I wanted to save it! I have no strong preference either, but I will have a look at the other aldehyds, and decide then.--Stone (talk) 16:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Which image did you want to save? As an admin, I can undelete it for you if it was inappropriately deleted.  A bunch of images of mine were just speedy deleted too, but they were all unused. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Trisodium citrate
Hi, shouldn't Trisodium citrate be just a redirect (to sodium citrate) rather than an article of its own? Badagnani (talk) 00:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right. I have redirected it now.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 02:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Block of 68.55.219.186
Edgar181, I appreciate you blocking 68.55.219.186 for 24 h for disruption. However, the IP editor is clearly Matt Sanchez editing in violation of a one year ArbCom ban and indefinite community ban. One edit made after I reported to WP:ANI is signed by Matt, and another series were to post his photo wearing Marine Corps Dress Blues. The last IP he posted as was block by John Vandenberg for a month, as this ArbCom log shows. I suggest that a lengthier block is in order. Thanks, Jay*Jay (talk) 15:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, it seems reasonable to extend. I've changed it to a one month block.  Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for acting. By the way, I think you are supposed to record the block here.  Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 15:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have now added a comment there. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Help with this user:76.185.159.208
I noticed this user had edited the article Poker and added it to the category of Category:2000s_fads. I undid his edit and saw that nearly all of his edits have been to put articles into these fad categories (his edits). I'm not sure if he is breaking any rules but I am pretty certain that him mass spamming these categories can't be right either. I also don't believe his categorization of some topics he has added could be considered a fad either.
 * Examples Digital camera, Internet café, Tetris (1980s fad), Diner (1950s fad)

Thanks, Strongsauce (talk) 21:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Personally, I don't see anything inherently wrong with what that user is doing. Although, in some cases, it might be a bit of over-categorization.  For example, I wouldn't think that "1990s fad" is a major characteristic of a digital camera.  If you disagree with those edits, or are unsure what their purpose is, the best thing to do is to simply talk to the user about it. It seems to be a static IP, based on a consistent kind of edits since last year.  Or, if you think an article is getting over categorized, you can revert the edit using an explanatory edit summary, or you could simply bring it up on the article's talk page.  Hope this helps.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, looks like that category was already nominated for deletion back in November and someone else decided to recreate it. I'm going to look through the rest to see what (if any) changes need to be made. Strongsauce (talk) 03:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Another sock to block
Hi. Banned user Matt Sanchez, whose sock you blocked yesterday, has apparently resurfaced, just as angry as usual,here and here. Would you mind blocking again? --Eleemosynary (talk) 05:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Never mind. He's been blocked.  Thanks for yesterday, though. --Eleemosynary (talk) 06:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The block imposed was 55 hours. I have asked Slakr as the blocking admin to extend it in line with previous blocks here.  Cheers, Jay*Jay (talk) 07:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

SCDS high school
hey, i can't figure out how to leave you a comment, so i just will now. I think that you banning the school for so long over the one small "god" issue was somewhat immature. now, i respect you and all that you do, but i speak for the school when i say, "what the hell, man." -caseman13, member of SCDS high school

(ps- the reference was about dr. bell being god....) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caseman13 (talk • contribs)


 * I have no way of knowing which article or which "banning" you are referring to unless you tell me. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding 207.81.109.60
Recently you blocked this anonymous user and their unblock request was declined. Honestly, I disagree with this.

The behavior of all of the regulars here looks to me like very obvious breaches of WP:AGF and WP:BITE. The user was asked once to provide sources, in an edit summary. New users are probably not experienced enough to know to check the article history when their changes suddenly vanish. There was no talk page message asking for sources.

Edit warring is unacceptable, yes, but IMO not any more unacceptable than biting new users without even making it clear what the issue is. The block message was simply "Vandalism."

Would you be willing to reconsider this unblock request? I have told the user that if she provides sources to me in an email message I will unblock her early, but honestly I think she already understands what the issue was. I'm just a little ticked myself that the first time she was aware of the real issue was when her unblock request was denied. We can't expect people to follow policy if we don't let them know right away why what they're doing is wrong. Slapping uw-vandalism on their page does not count when the edit wasn't vandalism to begin with.

Thanks for your consideration. --Chris (talk) 02:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, it seems to have been more miscommunication than anything else. I saw the edit warring and the addition of text such as "Most of the following statements are either inaccurate or deliberately misleading," which came across as simple vandalism.  I have now unblocked the IP.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the speedy reply. I'll let her know.  --Chris (talk) 12:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

(1S,2'S)-2-methylpiperidinyl-3-cyclohexen-1-carboxamide (SS220)
Hi Ed. Can you please look up the CAS number of that substance, which has a stub article in de-WP, in SciFinder (PubMed)? I looked for it in several databases, where I have access to. If I had a model, I would create and upload an image of the structure to Commons. I would possibly make a mistake when I would rely just on the name of the substance. --Leyo 19:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The CAS# is 298207-27-9. I've created a structure image and uploaded it to commons, too.  [[Image:SS220.png|50px]]  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Great, I added it to the article. Thanks a lot. --Leyo 21:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Any time - I'm happy to help. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey Edgar181, the CAS-Nr. ist not 298207-27-9, but 69462-43-7. I've added the Info (e. g. PubChem. Or did I miss anything? Cheers, --Yikrazuul (talk) 19:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * CAS#69462-43-7 is for a compound with the same connectivity, but with undefined stereochemistry. CAS#298207-27-9 is in fact correct for the enantiomer Leyo inquired about.-- Ed (Edgar181) 20:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Based on a quick look in the literature, SS220 refers specifically to the single enantiomer, and therefore I believe the changes that you made to the German article not correct. PubChem is very prone to errors, so I wouldn't rely too heavily on the fact that they only have the diastereomeric mixture on file.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

3-chlorotoluene
When you add chlorine to Toluene, the chlorine will add to the ring in the ortho or para position. CH3 is an ortho/para directing group, and activating, so you would probably end up with both mono and di halogenated products. What reaction would result in chlorine adding to the methyl group? With regular chlorination you would end up with a mix of 2-chlorotoluene, 4-chlorotoluene, 2,4-chlorotoluene and 2,5-chlorotoluene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RogueNinja (talk • contribs) 22:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Reaction of chlorinating reagents with toluene will only produce the products you describe if done under conditions that lead to electrophilic aromatic substitution (such as by adding a Lewis acid catalyst) - and you are correct about the mixture of products you will likely get.  However, chlorination with a radical catalyst (see free radical halogenation) is a more common reaction process, and in the case of toluene, will react exclusively at the benzylic position rather than the aromatic positions to produce benzyl chloride.  I've added a clarification in the article (which I probably should have done when I made the previous changes).  I hope this helps.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks. That clears everything up.  RogueNinja talk  00:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia local wiki (wikimetro.org) feedback request
I am a Wiki developer, have spent the past 12 months developing wikimetro.org in asp.net as a local wiki and would like to ask for (expert) feedback. www.wikimetro.org a local wiki 04:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC) Jeff Brauer

Sorry for any inconvenience caused Thanks and Regards, Jeff
 * I don't really have experience with wikis aside from Wikipedia, and I don't have any wiki development experience, so I don't think there is much feedback I could give you. Sorry, but hopefully you can find someone else to help you out.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandal
How long is the block for this ip 207.63.213.204?  S  t  a ff w aterb oy♂ 18:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 48 hours. You can also check the block log at Special:Log/block any time, like this.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Polysorbate 80
Hi, can you add an image for Polysorbate 80? Badagnani (talk) 06:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's added now. -- Ed (Edgar181)

Johnny Warman
Dear Edgar, I am contacting you because my site was vandalised by a poor misguided individual from Belgium. He thought it was funny to change my name from Warman to Boreman and I believe you tried to delete that for me? He also added some rather strong language that just shows the sort of guy he is. Is it possible for you to change it back to the original way it was? I will attempt to myself but would appreciate any help you can give me regarding this, and possibly any way I can prevent this from happening again please? Kindest Regards Johnny Warman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnywarman (talk • contribs) 15:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks like you've fixed the current vandalism yourself. By the nature of Wikipedia, there isn't much that can be done to prevent vandalism like this, but it can be quickly reverted.  I have now put the article on my watchlist, so I'll be able to keep an eye on it.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Castletown-Geoghegan
Last month you blocked User:Steph mcdonnell for her edits to Castletown-Geoghegan. She has vandalised wikipedia again since the release of her block. Now she has left a message on her talk page on the same day as 213.202.160.231 vandalised Castletown-Geoghegan in the exact same way. This leads me to believe that 213.202.160.231 is infact Steph mcdonnell's IP sock. Thanks TheProf | 2007 16:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That user has been nothing but disruptive, so I've blocked indefinitely. I semi-protected the article Castletown-Geoghegan, so it should be safe from the IP socks for a while.  If anything else turns up, just let me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Needs diagram

 * Disodium pyrophosphate
 * Sodium pyrophosphate
 * Zinc pyrophosphate
 * Diammonium phosphate

Badagnani (talk) 09:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * All done now. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I think you are the best Wikipedia editor. Badagnani (talk) 07:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

New ones:


 * Sodium hexametaphosphate
 * Sodium tripolyphosphate
 * Magnesium phosphate
 * Monosodium phosphate

Badagnani (talk) 07:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, done. And thanks for the kind comment.  :)  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

F18
Should the F18 diagram include carbon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.130.134.130 (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Which diagram? -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

vanadocene dichloride - image is titanocene dichloride
Hi. Just spotted this. cheers--Axiosaurus (talk) 17:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's fixed now. Thanks for catching it.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Images
What program do you use to draw your images? I just added pictures of the three other isomers of Chlorotoluene, but they are small and lower quality compared to yours. I did my in IsisDraw, and then saved them with photoshop. RogueNinja talk  20:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I use ChemDraw, but you should be able to get good results using IsisDraw too. The key is to scale up the images - I typically use 500% scaling.  There are detailed recommendations at WikiProject Chemistry/Structure drawing for the drawing settings.  If after reading that you have more specific questions, please just let me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, of course. Thanks! RogueNinja talk  21:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Carbonyl chemistry
Do you have any advice for trying to learn the many, many reactions that carbonyl compounds are involved in?

RogueNinja talk  20:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I can't think of any way of learning them better than with a good introductory textbook. Personally, I like "Introduction to Organic Chemistry" by Streitwieser and Heathcock.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Diagrams needed

 * Potassium hydroxide
 * Rubidium oxide
 * Ammonium hydroxide

Badagnani (talk) 05:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what to do about any of those three. Ammonium hydoxide isn't really a compound that exists by itself, as the article describes.  Both potassium hydroxide and rubidium oxide are inorganic compounds that would probably be best off with images that show their crystal structures (as is depicted in sodium hydroxide), but I don't really know how to create suitable images for that.  I've added your request to WikiProject Chemistry/Image Request.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV
I have set a watch on WP:AIV and noticed my name twice. The vandalism was in fact coming from this computer from one of my friends. It was just a joke from some friends. I just wanted you to know that. I apologize for any inconvienence caused from some friends. D u <font color="#009900">s <font color="#0000ff">t <font color="#6600cc">i talk to me 17:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I'll unblock the IP you want.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do so, it wasn't anything all that serious, considering who it was :) (You gotta know him). <font face="comic sans ms"><font color="#ff0000">D <font color="#ff6600">u <font color="#009900">s <font color="#0000ff">t <font color="#6600cc">i talk to me 17:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, it's now unblocked. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I have discussed what Wikipedia and Vandalism is about with them, and that I bailed them out this time, but it won't happen again, because if I ever succeed in an RFA, I will block them myself :) (For some reason, they didn't like that lol). Thanks again, and Sorry on their behalf. <font face="comic sans ms"><font color="#ff0000">D <font color="#ff6600">u <font color="#009900">s <font color="#0000ff">t <font color="#6600cc">i talk to me 17:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Undefined ref tags
Hi Ed. On de-WP, I have eliminated undefined ref tags in articles with some help of other users. I looked for them with a simple search string (there are still some in google cache). When I looked for the same in en-WP there are much more articles than there were in de-WP (some fifty). Over 1000 articles are just too much to handle. Is there a WikiProject taking care of such things (quality control, formatting)? Or could AutoWikiBrowser automatically find out the diff links, where these errors first occured? IMHO it is quite ugly to have “ Cite error: Invalid tag; no text was provided for refs named xxx ” in articles. --Leyo 20:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have seen and fixed a few of those, but I don't know of any Wikiproject involved in finding and fixing them. The task of finding them and hiding them using hidden comments seems like a task that could be automated. So perhaps you can make a request at Bot requests.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think that I would be a good idea to simply hide them by adding . For that purpose, also MediaWiki could be changed not to display these errors any more or to show them as a hidden category (except for the preview mode, where the errors should certainly be showed). However, the best option would be to correct them and not to just hide them, but that would be an enormous task. --Leyo 20:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, fixing them is the best option. I tried looking around to see if I could find any organized effort to fix or improve references, but I can't find anything.  Sorry I can't be of much help.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

sorry
My edits were a joke. Superhoops knows me, and it was funny, We burst into fits of laughter. Your a medaling busybody.

--Proxie moron (talk) 19:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. But, it is not meddling (or medaling).  Vandalism to other people's user pages is quite common, and it should be reverted when seen.  If you would like to contribute to Wikipedia, please do;  otherwise, please find somewhere else to play.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

64.33.161.12
Hello. Just curious as to why you blocked. The IP's last edit was at 14:22, with issuing a level 2 warning at 14:53, level 3 at 14:54, and level 4 at 14:54 ... 32 minutes after the IP stopped editing. I was going to decline the block request, but you had already blocked the IP. --Kralizec! (talk) 20:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I generally don't block in these situations...I must have misread the times. I'll go ahead and unblock.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate your due diligence. The fact that this was even reported to AIV concerns me enough that I went ahead and left a not for the editor.  Our jobs as admins are made that much harder when editors totally ignore AIV criteria like this.  Thank you again for your time, Kralizec! (talk) 20:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I removed a bunch of reports today that didn't involve active vandalism, but fortunately it's not too common. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

My edit to Heroin
I removed a piece of the Heroin page, it was a piece in which some person was screeming that heroin was good and everybody had to use it. It did not add anything to the article in the form of information so i removed it. Why did you put a piece on my talk saying that what i added "not constructive" or something like that. Why did you do that ?

you put it on my talk on the 17th of January —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burds (talk • contribs) 10:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What I saw was that you added your signature to the article, which is not appropriate; but I didn't realize that what you trying to do was to undo the nonsense that someone else added. Sorry about the misunderstanding.  I've replaced the warning message on your talk page with a welcome message.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok thank you. So if i remove something i should not put my signature ??--Burds (talk) 10:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. Details are at Signatures if you're interested.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Grawp and his sock drawer
Terima kasih — (Thank you). Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Im sorry if im doing something wrong, however, most of the vandals i have been reporting have already been issued with a level 4 warning prior....what am i meant to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prom3th3an (talk • contribs) 13:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * With IP addresses that are shared, it's likely to be a new user each day, so I think it's best to give them a warning first - even if the IP was warned within the last couple of days - then see if they stop. If not, then report them to AIV.  Thanks for your efforts, they are appreciated.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

User: 131.109.141.4
I saw your vandalism warning on the page of this user, and that you issued a final warning two days ago. The user has just vandalised this page. I would be very grateful if you could please do the necessary and have the address permanently blocked. Many thanks. Ravenseft (talk) 09:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Permanently blocking an IP address is generally not a good idea; but because of the continuing vandalism, I have blocked the IP for a week. Thanks for letting me know.-- Ed (Edgar181) 11:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Schoolblock for 165.155.192.93
Thanks for the block on User talk:165.155.192.93. It really should be a schoolblock. --TimTay (talk) 14:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Schoolblock is probably preferable, but won't make much difference for a 24 hr block. I use the schoolblock whenever I see that the IP belongs to a school, but just missed it this time.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Spinning molecules
Hi! I'd like to know how can I make something like this: spining molecule.

Is there some kind of an easy-to-use-and-cheap-or-free-software I can get somewhere? If you can answer, you can do it here. Thanks. --GarciaGerry (talk) 18:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't know of any cheap or free software that can do it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

"Inappropriate" links? No, not at all really...
How are the links I added "inappropriate"!?!?!? They are career sites for the companies whose pages I added them to. The companies want them there. Why don't you personally check with them yourself and you'll see. I work for them, I would know, of all people. Please quit messing with my companies' pages. It's really frustrating and annoying when I spend time getting the links added to have them disappear a short while later. What the heck is the big problem; I don't get it. Maybe if you actually checked out the information I am adding, you'd see it's perfectly legit, useful and NOT spam. Please stop removing my work. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Career Genie (talk • contribs) 10:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Adding the same links to multiple articles is generally inappropriate, and often considered spamming, especially when they are links to websites you are affiliated with. Please see Wikipedia's guidelines at WP:EL and WP:COI.  If you think they are usefull links, you can propose addition of the links on the articles' talk pages and see if there is consensus to add them.  Thank you.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

They are not the same links though...again, check them out and you'll see they are completely different websites. It shouldn't matter whose affiliated with what- how do you think those other links got there? Probably by someone who was affiliated with that particular site somehow. Well, I don't know how much consensus is needed, but apparently that's what I have to do now. How silly, and sad. I'm shocked Wikipedia has as much stuff on it as it does, with how hard it is to add perfectly good information to a page. Ridiculous. I know there's spam out there, but this is just taking it too far. I really don't have time to be doing all this extra junk, but these companies won't be happy if their career sites aren't showing up on here. So, if you are able to look at this situation again and stop removing my links, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks! Career Genie (talk) 11:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing
Your Welcome. I'm still waiting for someone to give me a barnstar. I've been reverting for a while know and there isn't any barnstar waiting for me. Anyway, Thanks.--<font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3"> RyRy5 <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="5"> talk  21:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Wait no more... -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Wow, my first anti-vandalism award.--<font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3"> RyRy5 <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="5"> talk  21:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that I reverted a page blanking of an adminisrator. I'm planning to become or try to become an admin when I have 5000+ edits and 3-5 months of service. I have been at wikipedia for 1 month 1 day, and I already have 1875 edits (counting deleted edits. Without deleted ones, I have about 1825+ edits). Thanks again.--<font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3"> RyRy5 <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="5"> talk  21:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Ceftobiprole
Dear Ed, have some comments to the structure of ceftobiprole, some sterochemical informations in the structure are not correct, e.g. the E/Z configuration on the N-oxime which should be N-OH, double bound missing. see http://aac.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/48/7/2570. If you want I can provide you the structure (Isis, png) + some additional informations about Ceftobiprole. Best regards Florian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roesti (talk • contribs) 09:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The image I made matches the structure shown at the PubChem link here. It is simply a tautomer of the one shown in the reference you cite.  Since it's quite likely that there is an equilibrium between the two, both are really representations of the same compound.  But I think your reference is more authoratative than PubChem, so I will change my image to match that.  Thanks for letting me know.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for repairing my talk page after vandalism. I was too slow to see who else the now cancelled account had been vandalising to see what might have been the common link. Kevin McE (talk) 12:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I think it's just mindless and random.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Re
I have issued him notices for the articles in which he did not use edit summary. How is it "harassment"?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 20:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * One is enough. Fourteen is WAY too many.  Reverting his removal of the message is inappropriate as well.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting that comment.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  00:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Faith in Action
Hi Ed, I appreciate your help with untagging the username. Also what suggestions do you have to make the faith in action page more in line with the wikipedia guidelines? Thanks for your input. Jackey —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faith in Action (talk • contribs) 15:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * First of all, I'd recommend changing your username because usernames that match the names of organizations are generally not permitted on Wikipedia. (It's probably easiest to just abandon this one and sign up with a new one, rather than going through the process of transferring contributions from one account to another username.) Secondly, if you think Faith in Action meets the notability guidelines I directed you to, and you think you can write a neutral article consistent with Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, then you can create the page at Faith in Action (rather than at User:Faith in Action).  Keep in mind that other editors may at any time nominate the article for deletion if they feel it does not meet Wikipedia guidelines.  Also, if you want a copy of the deleted text from the user page, just let me know and I can give it to you.  Hope this helps.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Blocking
I was trying to figure out how to block someone, and I think I figured it out, but you already blocked them. Can you tell me how to block people? I know they have to have multiple warnings, and all that, I just couldn't find the page to request the block. I also have a few other questions and have requested for someone to adopt me. :) Chexmix53 (talk) 21:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * To block someone, you need to be an administrator. If you would like to report someone to be blocked by an administrator, you can do so at WP:AIV.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Personal Attacks Against You
I found this Diff. I rv it, but not sure where else to report it to.--Adamfinmo (talk) 10:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Every administrator gets that kind of silly abuse regularly. You can just revert it and warn the user.  Thanks for letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Image bug
Just so you get an orange page top notice: I have fixed the template you asked me to fix. :))

--David Göthberg (talk) 18:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Hyland Software deletion
Hi, I am a new user and tried to look up information about a company called Hyland Software. I found that you contributed somehow to its deletion and I wondered why you did so. I also saw that someone put in a request for the page to be completed. Is there anything else I can do to get this page up and running?

--Anthony510 (talk) 01:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I deleted the article in July of 2007 because it was empty. The entire contents were "Hyland Software".  Before that, in 2006, however, there was an article that was a bit longer.   It was proposed for deletion by User:Storkk because he felt it didn't meet notability requirements outlined at WP:CORP.  It was then deleted by User:Messedrocker.  If you think the company does meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, you can rewrite the article or ask me (or another administrator) to restore the old version.  Just be aware that if other editors disagree that it meets notability guidelines, it may again get nominated for deletion.  Hope this helps.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Otrin
Hello Ed. Otrin's first act after the release of his block was to go to my and User:Dekisugi's talk pages to try and antagonise us both into further confrontation. Suggest re-blocking. Thanks and have a nice day. TheProf - T / C 13:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Suggest you leave me alone, like I requested numerous times, like this harrassment, that I stated in my unblock request. Otrin (talk) 13:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Octyl acetate
Hi, I was wondering if you could add the value of the retention factor for octyl acetate. I've been desperatly looking for it for a while now. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by WinnieAlex (talk • contribs) 18:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've looked for that kind of data, but unfortunately I can't find anything. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for further editing of Rebamipide
Hello. Could you please edit the article Rebamipide? I have just added a drugbox in that article.

Carlo Banez (talk) 17:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added an image and a bit of data. Is that what you had in mind?  -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)