User talk:Modest Genius

 Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages by four tildes, like this: ~ 

Attention: We, Wikipedians, dislike fragmented discussions. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page, my talk page, as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

PoS, self-published, no review?
Where did you get that information? As far as a I can tell, every proceedings' peer review is up to the conference chairs. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:28, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't recall exactly what I was doing 16 months ago... 'Self-published' means that SISSA publishes it themselves, they don't contract a commercial publisher - contrasting with the journals also listed there. Perhaps that could be phrased better.
 * As for not reviewed, Proceedings of Science is a series of conference proceedings, not a journal. In most fields of science (exceptions include computer science and some areas of engineering), conference proceedings are not peer-reviewed. They undergo a quick check by a guest editor (usually one of the conference organisers) to ensure they're in the right format and aren't obviously crazy, but that's it. They're not sent to referees, there are no reports to guide substantial revisions etc. The purpose is to record what was presented at the meeting, not serve as formal publication of the work - it's a form of grey literature. I understand the PoS 'about' page as saying that PoS does not provide peer review, so if editors want it they'll have to do it themselves. Most don't, except in the fields mentioned above. Modest Genius talk 17:24, 23 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I've tweaked the wording to 'published in-house' and added website references for each entry. Modest Genius talk 17:39, 23 November 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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Rubicon
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash; Rubicon &mdash;has been proposed for merging with Crossing the Rubicon. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Everything for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Everything is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Everything (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Chris Troutman ( talk )  14:03, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I don't think I've ever edited that page, so am puzzled why you notified me about it. Modest Genius talk 11:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Your oddly passionate refusal to allow Starship "in the news"
The last several times Starship got in the news section it was in a negative sense and now the first time that a massive success has been achieved you seem very passionate about making sure it doesn't make it into the news section. What exactly is your beef with Starship's soft-landing ocean touchdown success? Ergzay (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I have nothing against Starship per se. What annoys me is SpaceX and their fans promoting every incremental test as if it's a revolution in spaceflight. If/when Starship successfully launches a real payload (not a tech demonstrator or a car) into orbit, I'll be happy to support posting that in ITN. Until that happens, it's not a operating launch vehicle. To me, gradually improving test flights don't cross the threshold for a blurb. Modest Genius talk 10:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Except it _was_ a revolution in spaceflight. And this one wasn't a gradual improvement. It was a massive leap that exceeded most expectations for what was possible. Most SpaceX fans I knew expected it to fail long before it did, and that was the expectation set by SpaceX before the launch as well as they only wanted to "get deeper into the atmosphere" or "make it through peak heating". Ergzay (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Well, clearly we disagree substantially. But that's OK, ITN operates by WP:CONSENSUS. My opinion is unchanged though. Modest Genius talk 10:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2024 Stanley Cup Finals

 * Thanks, though I made only minor tweaks to the article two weeks ago, not the detailed game summaries that led to ITN posting. Modest Genius talk 10:33, 26 June 2024 (UTC)