User talk:Hannes Röst

Are you here because you think that my bot HRoestBot made a mistake? Please read the FAQ first. Maybe your questions will be answered there already.

Wilkommen
Nice to see a helpful editor working on techie things in WE. Lots to do here and an opportunity to learn a lot of stuff from various folks.--Smokefoot 16:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Lindlar
I am trying to figure out the meaning of the collection of chemical formulas at Lindlar catalyst. It is very, very difficult to depict the nature of a heterogeneous catalyst, but the thing you posted is not a Lindlar catalyst but a set of ingredients. Possibly you might choose to recast these formulas into some sort of in-line equation that describes how the catalyst is prepared, but the collection of individual formulas are barely relevant to the nature of catalyst itself. The catalyst does not contain lead acetate, for example - it is derived from lead acetate (or other lead(II) sources). Just a suggestion. Best wishes,--Smokefoot 16:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually I got the three compounds directly from Vollhardt, Organic Chemistry - a standard textbook as you might know. But actually I don't know any better way of picturing it and I don't know enough about the preparation technique that I could go any further and make a better picture (and I don't know how it would look like). Although the "+" indicates that these are individual substances mixed together. So would it be best do delete the picture again? Thanks, --hroest 18:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Jahangir tareen
Rather than blank a page or some such thing, use (substituting the appropriate URL) and let an administrator deal with it. Postcard Cathy 12:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:ETH-Hoenggerberg-2008.jpg
For this image, you say it was made by you, but you give GurkanSengun as the author. What gives? Lupo 13:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I uploaded it from en.wikipedia to commons. GurkanSengun is the author. --hroest 13:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I needed to this so I could use the image in the german article. --hroest 13:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, description fixed. When transferring images, be careful to maintain attribution in unambiguous ways. If you upload an image and it says "I created this image", people will of course assume you did create the image... Lupo 14:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

ETH
Hi, I have just seen on your de.wikipedia.org user page that you are an ETH student; well, it was easy to guess just looking at your edits. Please do not add captions such as "ETH Zürich, the most prestigious university in Switzerland" to articles in Wikipedia" — except if you have reliable sources to back this claim, but prestige is something quite hard to measure... Also, the changes you made to the lead of Education in Switzerland single out a couple of Swiss Universities, without explaining why they should be mentioned instead of the other ones. The lead is already quite long, so we should remove content rather that add more. Thanks ! Schutz (talk) 13:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Schutz. I agree that I am not completely neutral concerning this point and I dont hide the fact that I am a student there. But there are several universities that need to be singled out - as already happened was the university of Basel because its the oldest. Then there is the University of Zurich which is the biggest and then there are the ETHZ and EPFL that rank very high in the international rankings (ETH is always top of Switzerland, therefore I called it the most prestigious, if you want to I can replace the adjective - do you have a suggestion? But I think being this good in the rankings does qualify for being the most prestigious one I think?). About the university of St. Gallen I am not sure but its one of the more prestigious ones too in the field of economics and business. Instead of removing content we might be able to write one sentence to each university, explaining what its strenghts are etc, seems to me the better solution. Greetings --hroest 19:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I would avoid "prestigious" at all cost, since it is impossible to measure (and hard to define). If a University ranks high in a ranking, then we can say so, but I would not extrapolate from there. Also, don't forget that there are many different rankings available (I wouldn't be as bold as you are when saying that ETH is always top of Switzerland), so it would be better to have a secondary source that summarises several of these rankings rather than point to one or two of them, which is bound to be POV. Also, as you imply, not all Universities are active in all fields (e.g. neither ETH nor St. Gallen offer medicine studies), and every University is bound to be the "best" in Switzerland in at least one field (a few examples of renowned universities off the top of my head: international relations in Geneva, forensic sciences in Lausanne, law in Fribourg, medicine in Bern, economics in St. Gallen, architecture in Ticino). I agree that there are few enough universities in Switzerland that they can all be mentioned here; it would be nice to explain their strengths, etc, but it is going to be a very hard task if you want to avoid POV and stick to sourced information ! All the best, Schutz (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you are right about the word "prestigious" but I do not have a substitute available that would express the same content. Feel free to propose one. You are right in that one ranking is not an adequate source, therefore I looked around and found some others that basically said the same thing (see list below). It is not our task here to criticize the rankings, but we can merely depict their results and reproduce their findings. I do not deny that many universities in Switzerland are good at what they do and have fields where they are leading in Switzerland but it seems obvious to me that ETH has the best international reputation, given the rankings. ETH was on top of all the national and international rankings I could find, the Shanghai ranking was just one example...here are some more:
 * Shanghai Ranking 2007 27th, first in Switzerland . Shanghai Ranking 2008 15th in Natural Sciences and Mathematics, first in Switzerland
 * Times Higher Education Supplement World University Rankings 2006 24th, first in Switzerland. In 2007 it placed 42nd, first in Switzerland.
 * In the Newsweek Ranking The Top Global Universities it was ranked 21st, first in Switzerland.
 * In the Webometrics_Ranking_of_World_Universities it placed 32nd and top in Switzerland.

. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Meatsgains (talk) 02:39, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Richard Yost) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Richard Yost.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 03:30, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Susan Weintraub) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Susan Weintraub.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 07:44, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Canadian Society for Mass Spectrometry moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Canadian Society for Mass Spectrometry, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:21, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Thanks for creating Biemann Medal.

User:Doomsdayer520 while reviewing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 14:16, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Canadian National Proteomics Network
Hello Hannes Röst,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Canadian National Proteomics Network for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

 Onel 5969  TT me 15:19, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

WP:MEDRS
This review https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24845483

Meets WP:MEDRS. Why did you remove it? Best Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:37, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

spell.py
Greetings!

As a fellow Wikipedia spell-checker, I was wondering if your spell.py tool is still supported? For example this attempt is getting some sort of libmysqlclient error. Thanks! -- Beland (talk) 23:53, 13 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, nice to hear from you! I currently host it here: http://wiki.hroest.ch/wiki/spell.py Best --04:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Metabolomics (journal)


Hello, Hannes Röst. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Metabolomics".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Meszzy2 (talk) 06:39, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Emily M. Gray Award, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Douglas Robinson. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

WP:NPROF Highly cited quantification
Hello I was hoping you could help me understand how many citations qualify for NPROF. You commented in one discussion that 15 citations over 16 years is not enough to qualify. I think I read somewhere that 100 citations was enough. Could you help me get a sense of how many citations are needed to qualify for notability for academics? Nweil (talk) 21:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * there is no hard cutoff that we can use since different fields have vastly different citation rates. In biomedicine, 100 citations is very little and would never convey notability, the threshold is probably closer to 10k. However in the humanities, 100(s) of citations is actually decent and a few book reviews will provide notability. There is no clear numeric cutoff and it depends on the field, the circumstances, potential awards the person has won etc. We cannot easily turn WP:NPROF#1 into a numeric cutoff that is why it is worded the way it is: "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.". Best regards --hroest 00:37, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * thanks. And it is cumulative correct? Like in the context of the George Leef discussion, he has over 200 citations across all his works, so that might actually qualify? Or it has to be focused on a single work. Nweil (talk) 01:06, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * yes, this is cumulative as WP:NPROF#1 states "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.". However, at his field it seems that 200 citations would qualify for a discussion about him, and not immediate dismissal, but 200 is not really be a lot in this field. --hroest 03:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 24
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charles Smith (pathologist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi
I wanted you to know that your edit was reverted by me not because of what you said but because it can be fixed by adding more info from the same source (i.e. Swissinfo). Best, 172.58.236.248 (talk) 05:23, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I dont necessarily disagree with the point, however we have to respect WP:DUE and look at Economy of Germany, Economy of USA and others which also do not discuss the topic. Secondly, we have to look at the quality of the source. It is a survey which are generally unreliable and dont provide accurate numbers for what they actually want to measure. Thirdly, even worse, the survey measured "Suspected cases" of a wide variety of crimes ranging from embezzlement to sexual misconduct which are vastly different. --hroest 14:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * It says according to "an international whistleblowing study". The fact it is not mentioned by other country articles yet does not interfere with anything or prejudice my edit according to WP rules. The source is Swissinfo which meets WP:RS here. Best. 172.58.239.26 (talk) 04:37, 3 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Just because something appears in a RS, does not mean it *has* to be added to the article. You can start a discussion at Talk:Economy_of_Switzerland to try and convince other editors that it should be added. It would for example make more sense to say "Switzerland has comparatively low rates of suspected unethical behavior within companies" which is more accurate and provides a very different picture than what you added. --hroest 13:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC) PS: I also looked at the original study which is what we should rely on in this case and not the media report. The study was a survey by Fachhochschule Graubunden and as far as I can tell self published and *not* published in a peer reviewed journal, so the lowest rung in terms of scientific research publishing. --hroest 13:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)


 * @Hannes rost: I don't think what you say contradicts the fact we should report all the FACTS here. We dont care about the "image" as long as it is reported by a reliable source like Swissinfo here. You can add other reports as you see fit later on to complete the picture. Regards. 2A02:120B:7F4:1310:4E3C:16FF:FE2A:C48E (talk) 11:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree, but at the same time we should not add low quality information and the article has to present a coherent overall picture, see WP:UNDUE. --hroest 19:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomson Medal (Royal Society of New Zealand), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Robert Anderson and Peter Lee.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Blockchain/cryptocurrencies standard notice
JBchrch  talk  14:44, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

July 2021
Your edit to Houston Grand Opera has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information.   Sennecaster  ( What now? ) 02:10, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate if you could be a bit more careful when accusing other people of violating copyright. If you review my changes in the article, you will see that I did not add any copyrighted material, I did however re-phrase and cleanup some of the existing text in the lede. Thanks and I hope you are more careful in the future. --hroest 02:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I went off of a copypatrol link, and compared the second paragraph you added to the link provided in there. I used Archive.org to prove that the paragraph A) wasn't a rewrite reorder and B) was not the website copying wikipedia. I consulted offwiki with other editors if the paragraph was creative enough to be copyrightable or not, and it was. It was closely paraphrased or even directly copied enough that it counted as a copyright violation. We also always template for copyright violations, even small ones. The rest of your edit was fine. Hope this helped! Sennecaster  ( What now? ) 02:41, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi you misunderstand me, I am not contesting that the text was a copyvio, I am only saying that I was not the one who added it. If you look at my diff you can see that I did not add the text, I made changes to the lede and restructured the text that was already in the article, unaware that it was a copyright violation. The actual copyright violation was added here in September 2016. I understand that your tool flagged my edit but I expect due diligence before accusing me of adding copyrighted material and threatening to block me. I hope this clears up the confusion and we can move forward with removing whatever was copied, which seems to even more than just the text that you removed. --hroest 14:05, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I cannot threaten to block you. I have restored to your revision since it was a reverse copy, but I do want to point out that the diff showed your text as an addition and not a reorder like normal. Sennecaster  ( What now? ) 14:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * "I cannot threaten to block you" -- but it seems you did: Your text literally says "violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing." I hope you can see how this could be considered confrontational, especially in a case like this where I did not add any copyrighted material. You make a point that the software did indicate that I added the material, I make the point that the software was wrong. It was a misunderstanding, I hope we can leave it at that. --hroest 16:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eradication of infectious diseases, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 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 2022 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, 29 November 2022 (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) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Toronto WikiClub meetup
Hello! You are listed as a previous member of the Toronto WikiClub. The WikiClub is hosting a meetup event on 7 July 2024, and we'd love to have you if you are around! We have a photowalk and an editathon planned, as well as time for discussion! More info here: Meetup/Toronto/2024 July 7 SophieWMCA (talk) 17:25, 28 June 2024 (UTC)