User talk:Ldm1954/Archive 3

Why was my page declined?
per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Roger_V._Gonzalez

I believe you declined my page and yet I meet at least two of the eight academic-specific criteria and it says you only need to meet one. I meet criterion 3 (Fellow of American Society of Mechanical Engineers) and 5 (Endowed Chair at the University of Texas at El Paso. What is going on and what do I need to do. Rvgonzalez (talk) 19:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The endowed chair is not really relevant as nowadays there are too many of them. The fellowships are and I missed them, my error. It needs some format editing which you should not do, writing and editing pages on yourself is strongly frowned on. I will try and do some cleanup this week then pass it through. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Let me know what else you may need from me. Rvgonzalez (talk) 21:39, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello. Do you happen to know when you will approve the page? Rvgonzalez (talk) 05:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have cleaned up somewhat your page, but you are going to have to do far more.
 * Include a COI disclosure on your user page and the Talk page of the article
 * Add the title of your PhD to the infobox scientist, and other relevant information
 * Add an image
 * Provide sources as marked with a citation needed on the draft. These have to be independent, you should not use ones you provided yourself such as blurbs before talks. For instance, use a link to the pdf of your PhD, your commencement etc.
 * Note: there may be mistakes in what I have changed Ldm1954 (talk) 06:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi ... here is the situation. The Society launched this effort to bring recognition to fellows and hired an entity (American Wiki Editors) https://www.americanwikieditors.com/ to do this, and they have gone defunct (no number works, chat doesn't work, no responses to emails), and they left the project as is, and that is why I am not, as a non-experienced wiki developer, trying to bring this to a close. I hope that makes sense. Thus, several of the points you bring up like COI etc are new and unknown to me. What do you suggest? Rvgonzalez (talk) 17:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Plus, in Awards, I am a Fellow of the American Society of  Mechanical  Engineers, not Metallurgical Rvgonzalez (talk) 18:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I suspect the society may have been scammed. Theroadislong (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * So, what should I be doing now since it is looked upon as my doing my own bio? What is your recommendation? Rvgonzalez (talk) 21:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello ,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Graham Moorehead
How dare you accuse someone of lying about this subject's academic career! You clearly did not check the citations that PROVED HIS ACADEMICS. You should do yourself a favor and bone up on the definition of legal defamation in a public forum. I demand you remove your defamatory comments immediately, or be subject to further action. Act professional or retire from this work...I will not respond further. 2601:586:D021:1539:7460:63ED:6A0C:4453 (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)


 * It's not a good idea to threaten legal action on Wikipedia. See the page No legal threats. If you feel like you have been the target of defamation, you can read the page Libel. Please remember to be civil and assume good faith on the part of other users. HenryMP02 (talk) 16:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Your feedback is requested &#32;at Talk:Havana syndrome&#32; on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out! You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name. Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 03:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Links to user pages and sandboxes
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to user pages or sandboxes, as you did at X-ray diffraction. Since these pages have not been accepted as articles, user pages, sandboxes and drafts are not suitable for linking in articles. and such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been deleted, please do not re-add any such links, thank you - Arjayay (talk) 16:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

RVGonzalez Page
Hi LDMI1954 ... I think I found how to start a thread here for the page that was scammed that was started for me.

I asked a question via the previous discussion. But I presume you want it here? Rvgonzalez (talk) 17:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Etsko Kruisinga
Howdy, on my previous submission you mentioned to add more about his accomplishments and I have done so. Because you might be more familiar with this because of past review would you be available to review? thx. Deondernemers (talk) 02:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Some thoughts, with caveats that what I see is based upon Google's translation of the Dutch.
 * https://www.dbnl.org/tekst/anro001bioe01_01/krui005.php has more information. For instance you could add one or two of his better known books.
 * Mention his grammar contributions in both Dutch & English
 * Add information from that article about the archives -- useful to flesh him out.
 * Do a Google search. I found https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110846270.71 ; I currently don't have it but it looks like a decent review where you can find material. Also https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(83)90004-9, there seems to be a fair amount of material.
 * It takes work! Ldm1954 (talk) 02:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Alright! I will put that in tomorrow or whenever I find some time. Thank you again Ldm1954 Deondernemers (talk) 02:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Addendum: I did not check your changes -- I should have. Much, much better than before. I think you can do a little more, maybe also add an infobox with an image as there seem to be public domain ones around (or ones you can upload to Wikipedia). Then resubmit. I won't review the resubmittal, but I will keep an eye on it in case you get a weird review (they happen). Ldm1954 (talk) 03:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Professor Jiann-Wen Woody Ju’s Wikipedia page
Dear Professor Marks:

I extend my sincere gratitude for your invaluable comments and contributions to Professor Jiann-Wen Woody Ju’s Wikipedia page. Your insights have been instrumental in shaping the edits I am currently making. Professor Ju is also searching for additional evidence to substantiate the records on the Wikipedia page.

I have a query regarding the inclusion of certain awards and elections, particularly for the newly ones that have not yet been updated on the respective organization's webpage. However, we possess proof such as the Letter of Election from the President of the organization. Considering Wikipedia's requirement for publicly accessible sources, would such documentation suffice for verification purposes?

Thank you immensely for your time and assistance.

Best regards,

User: zhuwenli Zhuwenli (talk) 22:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Since there have been so many declines already I think you have to get it right the next time, or reviewers may get fed up and decline with no option to resubmit. This means that you have to wait for the organization to post it, or the university to announce it publicly.
 * N.B., remember that awards must be major. An APS fellow is considered major as they have many thousands of members. A small conference or an NSF creativity award are not really major. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Reference on Timeline of crystallography
What is the work being referenced as "Hirsch et al" on the Hans Boersch line from this revision (linked here) of the article Timeline of crystallography? I saw the reference error appear in the weekly listing. Recon rabbit  18:26, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft: Clemens Burda
Hi there! Thank you for your constructive criticism of my submission. As you instructed, I have added relevant citations and removed all the peacocks. In addition to that, I also added a major award instead of the junior awards you mentioned.

Please, let me know. Sigma Spurion (talk) 23:50, 7 May 2024 (UTC)


 * It is definitely much better. It would help if you can find sources beyond Case Western for him, as some will consider his university a (weak) primary source. Also, while AAAS is a useful award, I am not so convinced that it is that notable.
 * I won't review the new draft, I will leave that to someone else. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fiveling
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Fiveling you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of FuzzyMagma -- FuzzyMagma (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Re removal of notability on Data-driven astronomy
Forgive me if I'm a bit blunt professor, but the issues you raised on my talk are grounds for a tone tag, or a more specific tag for the same issue like essay-like or research paper, and if there's a specific proposal document that it were identical to, close paraphrasing or copyvio. They are not an issue that concerns Notability, which is not something that deals with the current state of the article (WP:NEXIST). That there are courses on the subject is a strong (albeit not perfect) indication there is sufficient published material to develop such a course. The fact that such material has not been properly included is immaterial for the issue of notability. The actual article being written on a specific project on that topic wouldn't make the topic non-notable any more than if we replaced the contents of another article with the contents of a random paper on the topic, say redshift survey and, as an example. The notability tag is not appropriate, because it does not identify the actual issue, which is that of article content. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Request on 03:43:45, 11 May 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Eppursimuove1492
Thanks for the review! Aside from referencing my own peer-reviewed journal article (which I flagged for COI), the draft also references an in-depth article published about the subject by Popular Mechanics, which is a nationally-renowned, independent and credible source. Here is a link to their article (since it may be behind a paywall): https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/fij6yxx7hexr9twlmyx8q/What-If-the-Big-Bang-Never-Happened_-A-Controversial-Theory-Explained.pdf?rlkey=ry2es2n70nak87pnx254rteoh&dl=0

Does the draft still need more? Thanks in advance

Eppursimuove1492 (talk) 03:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for established information which has been discussed/cited by multiple sources. It is not a site for describing new ideas, there must be significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV) by multiple sources, not just one, and topics must have been notable with sustained coverage (WP:SUSTAINED). To date these do not exist for this topic and until they do it should not be in Wikipedia, sorry. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Your advert tag on Anaxam
Can you specify, why you think this article contains content written like advertisment? I am a paid contributor in this case, which I disclosed on my user page, but tried to keep the information on this institution descriptive, sober and factual. J. Berndorff (talk) 08:52, 24 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The page is definitely way better than many I have seen. However, it still has a bit of sales "spin", for instance the sentence:
 * "To ensure the best possible, realistic test conditions, ANAXAM adapts the measurement procedure to their clients’ needs with specialist equipment"
 * I must have been in a bad mood that day. I have removed my tags. Ldm1954 (talk) 09:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for that. I will improve the sentence nonetheless. Best regards! J. Berndorff (talk) 12:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Your unfounded allegation that I misquote other editors
Re this edit of yours, I responded as follows ;


 * Strong objection: If you have evidence that I "misquote other editors", please provide the details, or remove your statement. With regard to the word "politely", how about walking the talk, rather than making unqualified assertions?

Either remove your allegation or provide supporting evidence. --- Sandbh (talk) 13:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

About S.Y.H. Su article
Thank you for visiting the article and your comments. I will try to dig out more infomation as you suggested.

I want to point out S.Y.H Su commenced his career in 1967 much before the age of internet. He retired quite a while ago. That is a signficant disadvantage in terms of the Google Scholar H index. Also, as you know, in some fields, the paper production and citation count can be significantly lower than in other fields. Incidentally he added Stephen to his name sometime after finishing his PhD. Thanks. Malaiya (talk) 23:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Pings
Just to let you know that unless something has changed recently, pings are only sent when the link is added in the same edit as your signature, so I only saw this edit because the page was on my watchlist. This tripped me up several times, so I thought I’d pass it along to you. YBG (talk) 05:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ronald Mathias, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MBE.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Eli Jerby
Hi, on behalf of Prof. Eli Jerby, please read and consider the following message. "To the Editor @Ldm1954: Beyond rectifiable editing and style issues, the editorial remarks posted in the public talk page of the entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_Jerby may hint a more fundamental objection. If this indicates indeed an unconditional, a-priori rejection of this content, I may only request to entirely remove this entry asap from Wikipedia. Thank you, Eli Jerby". I may note that the entry was written in cooperation with Prof. Jerby, as part of my intensive work to add and expand entries about Israeli academics; nevertheless, I got (and will not get) no benefit from him for this work. קוונטום דוץ (talk) 05:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Multiple different editors have been saying that the pages you are creating have problems. Listen to them. Ldm1954 (talk) 06:20, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I can't recall that I asked you to educate me. קוונטום דוץ (talk) 06:23, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Help needed to fix the Wiki page
Vladimir Lumelsky here: In response to Ldm54 comments on my unfinished Wiki page: you said, you need proofs, say on my being the journal's founding editor-in-chief or my former Yale Univ. professorship - but how and where can I add this information? Say, regarding my journal editorship, the journal's cover's backpage says that very clearly - can I send you or put in a photo of it - if so, how, is it enough? For my Yale professorship, after your comment I've called Yale, they sent me an email confirming that fact, with the time range - how can I get to you this proof? I'd much appreciate your response. Thank you. Lumelsky (talk) 11:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * You don't prove to me, you have to prove to readers.
 * For the editorship you put in an appropriate journal cite.
 * For Yale their email is no good as this is not verifiable by all readers. Maybe use wayback and find an old page they have that shows you, or some conference announcement.
 * Ldm1954 (talk) 16:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Editing the Article on Metal Casting Simulation
Dear Professor Laurence Daniel Marks,

On June 10th, you left a comment on my article "Metal Casting Simulation", suggesting that if no one else reviews it, I should inform you, and you might be able to assist with its publication. The article is currently in draft mode, and I have incorporated all your recommendations.I would be very grateful for your involvement and assistance in this matter.

With best regards, @Poligoncast

Poligoncast (talk) 16:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fiveling
The article Fiveling you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fiveling for comments about the article, and Talk:Fiveling/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of FuzzyMagma -- FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Professor, I wonder if I can pick your brain around this article http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.103351 (figure 6). Does it relate to fiveling and the authors did not figure that out, or I am just confused? FuzzyMagma (talk) 22:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Give me a few days please -- travelling in southern Australia. Ldm1954 (talk) 09:03, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @FuzzyMagma, their section 4.4.1 is all fivelings and friends such as the related Ic; as you thought they did not make the connection. You can find particles such as their bi-icosahdron of Fig 14 in Journal of Crystal Growth 54(1981) 433—438 & 61(1983) 556—566. I also published similar growth in Thin Solid Films, 136(1986) 309 315. Whether it is Ic growth as they suggest or Dh/poly particles is not clear to me; HREM would help.
 * N.B., need a good Ic page on WP, Todo list.
 * N.N.B., the idea of icosahedra etc in liquids is quite old, older than many of their cites. Ldm1954 (talk) 23:58, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks Professor. I think the novelty is that these are not observable in wrought austenite but now being observed in different FCC additively manufactured alloys including Nickel. FuzzyMagma (talk) 05:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The standard rationale for these shapes is surface energy anisotropy, as against the liquid phase ordering they mention. I have only dabbled in AM, so I am not sure how to get anisotropy, as I did not think the undercooling was high enough. If there is impurity surface segregation that might work. Evidence?
 * N.B., such discussions might be better off WP. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)