User talk:Narayanese/Archive2

Thanks!
Thanks for the copyedit on Utricularia inflata! I appreciate it. :-) Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 15:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Archosaur infobox
Excellent choice of pic! Philcha (talk) 18:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * :) Narayanese (talk) 18:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Review for RNA
I have reviewed RNA against the Good article criteria. It's mostly there, although there are some key issues that need to be resolved, so it's on hold until 1/19/2008. Please see the talk page for the actual review and comments. Dr. Cash (talk) 04:58, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Trojan War
Hi, I noticed you placed a fiction tag on Trojan War. Could you explain your objections on the article's talk page? To my mind, the article does address the difference between fact and "fiction" (a questionable concept to use here since we're dealing with mythology). --Akhilleus (talk) 18:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, should have done that. Will do!Narayanese (talk) 22:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Coelurus
Hello, Narayanese;

Thank you for the review and comments on Coelurus, and have a great day! J. Spencer (talk) 15:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:Smoke over Ndjamena.jpg
What is your source for this image being under a creative commons license?Genisock2 (talk) 18:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * at time 04:01. Narayanese (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Rock Pigeon
G'day Narayanese, Thanks for your review and feedback on the article. I left a reply on the talk page but thought I should thank you here too in case you miss it? I'll get to work on the fixes when I have some time. Cheers, Sting au  Buzz Me...   23:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've done a lot more to the Rock Pigeon article and was wondering if it is ready to renominate for GA? Could you take a look please? Sting au  Buzz Me...   01:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It should stand a good chance. You could add something about predators though. Narayanese (talk) 01:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I've found a link that mentions predation by peregrine falcons and sparrowhawks although about racing pigeons still applicable to wildtype species. Owls can be a problem too if birds out flying at dusk or perched in open. Cats of course enjoy a meal of pigeon. So if I add a "Predators" section should I name it like that and where in the article would it be best placed do you think? Sting au   Buzz Me...   02:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Put it in the same section as diseases IMO. Narayanese (talk) 07:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your edits in the current GA nom for the Rock Pigeon. The article is looking much better now. Do you think it will pass this time? Sting au  Buzz Me...   23:11, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course it would! Grats / Narayanese (talk) 23:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

TRNC recogonition of Kosovo
I see that you re-added the TRNC as a country has recogonised Kosovo. Do you have a source for that ?? The source given dos not mention in anything about an official recognition. So why did you re-add the TRNC ??

Travelbird (talk) 21:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It say Kosovo recognized by Northern Cyprus, you mean they have to have sent diplomats too to count? Narayanese (talk) 21:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No they have to send an official letter of recognition. There is a well established protocol how this works. Everything before that is just a statement of intent or a statement of support. E.g. Germany has stated repeatedly that it intends to recognize Kosovo, but the official letter of recognition will only be drawn up by the cabinet tomorrow and will then be sent ot the Federal President for a signature. Only when the latter send that letter to the President of Kosovo will the diplomatic recocognition of Kosovo have taken effect. Travelbird (talk) 22:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok. Narayanese (talk) 22:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

saRNA
Thanks for the suggestions regarding RNA interference Narayanese, I will certainly make the changes you suggest. Touchstone42 (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Purple leaf plum
Thanks for your (conditional) support. I don't understand your request of a source for the caption. Do you mean the article which uses the picture? Or the identification of the species? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

GA review
Hi, I've seen your review in Talk:Coelurus, if you want to, and have the time, I'd appreciate your POV on the review of Chrysiridia rhipheus. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 20:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I'll be gone for a week from tomorrow. It looks fine at a glance, though you should work on the prose of the first paragraph of Range, especially "protected" and "this way" are not immediatly clear. Narayanese (talk) 21:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Nguyen Ngoc Tho
Thanks for the note. I have labelled the people in the pic. Thanks, Blnguyen  (vote in the photo straw poll ) 02:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Rock pigeon
The males don't have more iridescence on the neck! Just because the Cornell lab of ornithology says it's so doesn't mean it's true. Genetically the cocks and hens have the same amount of neck feathering with exactly the same amount of iridescence. The cocks inflate their crops more when courting hens so what you get is an optical illusion of more iridescence. If the respected sources that Cornell used (they certainly didn't use their own)really wanted to get it right they would have mentioned that. But since this is Wikipedia after all then near enough is good enough.--Sting au  Buzz Me...   22:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Request to move article Splicing (genetics) incomplete
You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Splicing (genetics) to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:


 * 1) Added    at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article.  This creates the required template for you there.
 * 2) Added  NewName  to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
 * 3) Added  PageName  to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 17:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

GA Review for Battle of N'Djamena
Hello Narayanese. Just thought I'd let you know that I'm in the process of reviewing your GA Nominations for Battle of N'Djamena. I look forward to working with you in this review. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 23:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, sorry I haven't been able to get any copyediting done in the last few days. I've been bogged down with schoolwork (we all love HL Physics, NOT!).  however, I should have time to do a copyedit of the article tomorrow.  I've also put in a request at the MilHist Logistics Department for assistance.  Sorry for the delay.  Happy editing! Cheers! Cam (Chat) 06:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.
 * I note that you have been blocked, User:FiveRupees, for your edit warring and incivility. And I have a strong feeling that the text in that unsourced paragraph is nothing but fantasy. Narayanese (talk) 05:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, if you lived in Lebanon you wouldn't be saying that it's fantasy. I strongly suggest that you edit about things you know about ans stay away from articles you have nothing to do with, because you're making an idiot out of yourself. FiveRupees (talk) 06:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi!
You had written a review for an article I had a role in editing. I have posted my replies on its talk page. Kindly view that. Just as a matter of curiosity--judging by your user name, are you an Indian? Thanks for your detailed review. Regards. Ketan Panchal, MBBS (talk) 17:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope, Swede. I just chose Narayanese as username for a Myst forum, referring to a world in one of the games, and have stuck with the name. Narayanese (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hej Narayanese
I'm working on an article (for publication) that you might be interested in getting involved with. If you could drop me an email at [...] I can tell you a bit more about it and you can tell me Ja eller Nej. Take care.

--Ppgardne 13:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Coelurus image
Hi, I've removed the Coelurus image from the article. I may amend it later but since there is already a good image in the taxobox, this is not a priority... Thanks! ArthurWeasley (talk) 16:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

New changes
Hi Narayanese!

I've made quite a few changes to the article polyclonal response largely keeping in view your suggestions. When I read a couple of days back, I realized that the article provided very little background for those totally unrelated to the field. I've tried again to rectify that error.

Do let me know if these satisfy you to any degree, and also what else requires to be done whenever you find time for going through the article. (I've posted a similar message on the talk page of the article. But, since that didn't draw your attention, I thought it better to post it here, too.

Sorry somehow didn't read your reply regarding your nationality as had forgotten putting this page on my watchlist. I asked you as "Narayana" is a common Indian name, which is another name for a very important Hindu God—"Vishnu".

Regards.

 —Ketan Panchal  t aL K   12:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Citric Acid Cycle
Hello, I just noticed that you made a new version of the citric acid cycle image that was a featured picture by taking out one of the (usually unknown) temporary intermediates, cis-acotinate. I know that it's standard to think about the cycle as going from Citrate to Isocitrate, but the original image was more detailed and in a way more correct. I just wanted to get your side on why you think the edited image is better. Thanks ^_^ --146.9.246.182 (talk) 16:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * oops, forgot to log in :P --AutoGyro (talk) 16:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply at Talk:citric acid cycle. Cheers Narayanese (talk) 20:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

N'Djamena
As a significant editor to the last N'Djamena battle article, you might be interested in this: User:TheFEARgod/Battle of N'Djamena (June 2008). If they don't reach N'Djamena it could be named June 2008 rebel offensive in Chad--TheFE ARgod  (Ч) 18:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Polyclonal response
Hi! I am happy to inform that the article has been promoted to the GA status. By the way, I have renamed it as Polyclonal B cell response as I thought that sounded more appropriate.

Thanks for your interest in the article, and the suggestions and changes you made. You can of course continue to improve the article further.

Regards.

—Ketan Panchal <font color="#2F4F4F"> t aL K  08:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Centraldogma nodetails.GIF
Thanks for uploading Image:Centraldogma nodetails.GIF. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 23:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 23:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Admin?
Hi there, I'm trying to get more expert editors through the RfA process. If you think this could be useful to you I think you could pass this in a few months. If you are interested I'd recommend turning on the option so that you are prompted if you don't enter an edit summary, as well as watchlisting WikiProject Deletion sorting/Medicine and WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science to get some experience of deletion discussions. Tim Vickers (talk) 05:07, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've run across protected infobox templates a few times, so it could be handy. I'll try following your recommendations. Narayanese (talk) 11:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Morelia-viridis edit1.jpg
I actually only added this as it had been nominated as an FP and the nominator/creator had not placed it in an article, but it is a nice image and I find it interesting that you would not find it a better picture than either of the unsharp examples in the article now? Just wondering, I am curious, like I said its not my image so I have no vested interest in it? Mfield (talk) 21:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The three pictures already there are plenty better in terms of angle and contrast IMO. I had to look long and hard to tell what that sort of thing added picture was, it looks more like a hat than a curled up snake. Narayanese (talk) 21:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough as we are in disagreement about what constitutes an encyclopedic image, I've left it on the talk page for others to discuss/and or use if they want. Mfield (talk) 21:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Prosaurolophus
Thank you for the review, Narayanese! The forelimb thing is interesting in that Bob Bakker, who was the first big proponent of quadrupedal hadrosaurs, has now gone back and decided that the forelimbs were too slender to support the animal and were instead used as (I swear, I was at a talk where he described this) what may be best described as part of hadrosaur foreplay. If he ever publishes this, instead of just using it in talks, it would make quite an unusual addition! J. Spencer (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I had a little laugh at this. Cheers! Narayanese (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Fact tag in Gas
Hi Narayanese, I'm not sure why you added the fact tag to the part about intermolecular forces, the reference is the main article itself. There is no 'new information' in the article that would need a citation.Katanada (talk) 16:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The intermolecular force article does not say anything about hydrogen bonds being a sort of van der Waals force, and the statement in van der Waals force is tagged by someone as being unreliable. I remember having them treated separetely in textbooks, and when a google search only turns up papers that treat them as being separate, e.g. . Narayanese (talk) 16:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Heh, I read the sentence again. Sorry for that. Narayanese (talk) 16:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hehe thats cool, no worries. Katanada (talk) 17:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Cytosol
Thanks for reviewing this "stub"! :) I've made some changes and replied to your comments. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Editing Abiogenesis
Hey there, I made a suggestion on the talk page of abiogenesis, since I wasn't able to actually edit the page directly. I notice you made some recent edits to the page... how did you do that? I don't see the 'Edit' tab or any of the individual 'edit' links by the sections when I view the page. Thanks, Blorblowthno (talk) 18:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no edit protection for the page, so it's strange that you can't see the edit links, they work fine for me. Perhaps you had started editing and were in preview mode? Anyway, here is a link to the edit mode for the page. Narayanese (talk) 22:28, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

ambient pressure
I see that you removed the speedy delete and transwiki tags from Ambient pressure. There is indeed no article at ambient pressure because it was deleted on 26 October but it is still there in transwiki. That means that we still have an article here which is only a dictionary definition and is therefore not suitable for inclusion in wikipedia. Do you disagree with WP:CSD G7 and A5? If not perhaps you would have the good grace to sort out the deletion of Ambient pressure here. --RexxS (talk) 17:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh well, the further reading section is pretty bad now that I've taken a closer look. Narayanese (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

New version of blood values
Hi. Just wanted you to know that a new version of blood values is uploaded as a featured picture candidate, in case you have comments or further suggestions: Featured picture candidates/Blood values. Mikael Häggström (talk) 19:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

living organisms
The word organism in English does have other meanings that do not necessarily imply life. As the Plantae are a major subdivision of life, it seems more than reasonable to link to the page about life in the opening paragraph. I don't understand why you object to such a link. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That's a figurative meaning... and things that are figuratively said to be organisms will also figuratively be said to be alive, so no distinction is gained. Narayanese (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Except that figurative life is not the same as biological life. The article on life explains the basic properties of life, and this information is of core importance to understanding major biological groups and what defines them.  Removing that information thus hurts the article, while including it helps or is at most slightly redundant.  I would rather see an article that is arguably slightly redundant than an article deomnstrably diminished of key points. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there no way to include the link in a way that doesn't make it look redundant (can't see it myself, maybe change "They" to "These lifeforms" and link lifeforms to life). Narayanese (talk) 20:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The term "lifeform" is loaded when it is applied to plants; it is used in some of the ecological literature to refer to "habit" or "growth pattern" (e.g. tree, shrub, turf, etc.). If this were a level below kingdom, I could agree wholly with what you're trying to do, but for an article at this level, I think the grammatical acrobatics to avoid an apparent redundancy aren't worthwhile.  The phrase "living organism" is a set phrase and commonly used in English (817,000 Google hits). --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

fancy rat
While i understand your change of bloody sport -> blood sport, it was actually intentionally written that way because it was meant to contrast the concept of pet ownership with it's bloody origins. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 21:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, ok. Narayanese (talk) 05:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:RNA chemical structure.GIF
A tag has been placed on Image:RNA chemical structure.GIF requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. <font color="#990000">Ja <font color="#000099">Ga <font color="#000000" size="-1">talk 21:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Citric_acid_cycle_with_aconitate_2.svg
It looks like, for both cis-Aconitate and D-Isocitrate, the second carbon atom from the right is missing a (hydrogen?) bond. Is that correct? Vbdrummer0 (talk) 19:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right. I'll add it to them. Narayanese (talk) 22:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Narayanese (talk) 22:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)