User talk:Forbes72

If you have a question/concern concerning me or my edits or just want to drop a line, feel free to leave me a note here. Know that I'm not particularly familiar with Wikipedia's back-end coding and some procedures, but I have been a user since 2008, and am familiar with usual things like re-directs, editing citations, talk pages, and article merging/creating/deletion. Despite the fact that I'm not on Wikipedia particularly regularly, I will answer you eventually. :) Forbes72 (talk) 05:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment
You are receiving this message because you were a Good article reviewer on at least one article that is part of Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 or you signed up for messages. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of Good articles for copyright and other problems, unless a reviewer opens an independent Good article reassessment and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information. A list of the GA reviewers can be found here. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. You can opt in or out of further messages at this page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Looking for Feedback
Hi! As part of my university curriculum, I've contributed to the banking lobby wiki article which I believe you've contributed to before. I'm contacting past editors seeking feedback on my contributions, so if you could take a look at it, I would appreciate it. I am new to Wikipedia, so I apologize for any mistakes in the article. No problem if you cannot take a look, thank you for your previous contributions to the article! Peanutbutterisbad (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * First of all, thanks for contributing. I see the article was short and had a very US-centric scope before your additions, so I appreciate your work rounding out the scope of the article to cover more areas of the world. A couple suggestions for your contributions: adding information on the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, you cite the website of the group itself, and end up sounding a bit promotional. The group probably does play a role in international banking regulation, but it's better to source information from WP:THIRDPARTY sources to keep Wikipedia's coverage neutral and fair. In the Latin America section, you attribute lobbyist control to a lack of regulations. The source you cited does back up the point that lobbyists have a lot of control over the banking sector in these countries, but the source cited seems to talk about a lack of enforcement and lack of state capacity, rather than blaming elite capture on loose regulations. It's important to avoid WP:SYN and focus on summarizing what the sources cited say rather than trying to draw your own conclusions. Overall, I think you made a substantial improvement to the article; there a few places where you could improve the encyclopedic tone. &#12296; Forbes72 &#124; Talk &#12297; 19:19, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi! Thank you for this in-depth feedback - I really appreciate it. I will look into your suggestions and make those edits. Again, thank you! Peanutbutterisbad (talk) 21:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on 2012 in science
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2012 in science, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Qwerfjkl_(bot)&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 03:33, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
 * A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_in_science&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1162959648%7C2012%20in%20science%5D%5D Ask for help])

Chromatic symmetries
Thanks very much for your comment on the articles Dichromatic symmetry and Polychromatic symmetry. I thought of adding a new, summary article on Color symmetry, referencing the two existing articles, and replacing the current redirect to Color charge. Do you think that would be useful? GreatStellatedDodecahedron (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree redirecting color symmetry to color charge is less than ideal, but I am not sure we need a separate article for color symmetry, since it might end up duplicating the scope of those two existing articles. Perhaps a disambiguation page would be helpful instead. &#12296; Forbes72 &#124; Talk &#12297; 03:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Forbes72. Thank you for your work on Liquidus and solidus. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

&maltese; SunDawn &maltese;   (contact)   11:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Forbes72. Thank you for your work on January–March 2012 in science. User:Tails Wx, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Tails  Wx  02:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Gallium antimonide
Hi Forbes72. I've left some notes at Talk:Gallium antimonide about value of the direct bandgap of gallium antimonide. I changed the value that was given in the lead to what I think is a more accurate value that is more broadly supported in the literature, with other (secondary) sources cited. Since you originally added the bandgap to the article, I wanted to make you aware of this change and solicit your input at the talk page, if you would like to add anything. Best, MaterialsPsych (talk) 03:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey thanks for the nice work on trickle-down economics. It's nice to finally have someone fix that up. Andre🚐 04:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

ISSN numbers
Hi, while I appreciate your efforts and applaud the removal of undesirable iin-text external links, the additions made in this edit really are unnecessary. Clicking an ISSN number leads you directly to the corresponding WorlCat entry, so a "reference" to the ISSN portal is absolutely superfluous. One unwanted side-effect of this is that the list appears to be incredibly well-sourced, whereas in reality it is not. Basically, you replaced one EL problem with another... --Randykitty (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2024 (UTC)