User talk:Plumbago

- Welcome to Plumbago's talk page - Although it would be easier to follow a discussion if I replied to messages left here on this page, I often reply on your page. However, if I have posted on your talk page, I will be watching so you can reply there if you wish.



Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 12:50, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

about File:Face on Mars with Inset.jpg
Hello Plumago, I bought an image at a public auction that is supposed to come from the nasa. But I was surprised to see on wikipedia that you were the author of the insert. The link : https://www.drouotonline.com/publicLot/publicShow/6811480 What do you think ? Thanks, Caroline — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cydony (talk • contribs) 11:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Cydony. Erm I can't remember what I've done with the images in the past — it's been a while since I've done much more than revert vandalism in the Cydonia article. I may well have handled the images you mention in the past, and I would have used NASA / ESA images at that time. But from what I can see, the particular image that you highlight looks like it was created by someone else. In any case, are you concerned that Wikipedia's licensing is being abused? That is, someone (your public auction) is selling something that they aren't allowed to. --P LUMBAGO 14:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your response Plumago. Yes, I try to understand where the print is coming from. I have some doubts on the fact that its comes from the nasa itself as it is indicated. The image seems to be a printing of the wikipedia photomontage. In fact, image I bought is exactly the same as this one : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Face_on_Mars_with_Inset.jpg On the page, you are mentioned as the author of the insert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.151.55.201 (talk) 08:26, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Ocean acidification
hi plumbago,   thanks for being an editor... True the petition didn't go anywhere specifically, but the denial put EPA on the record that ocean acidification requires regulatory relief and that their programs, like the clean powerplant rule and the paris accords will provide that relief...all programs that are being walked back...the petitioners informed epa they would resubmit the petition if it became clear that epa actions would not in fact mitigate the problem,,, i will try again but this time adding more information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Docdonn (talk • contribs)


 * Hi Docdonn. Sorry if my edit seemed a little abrupt. I shot a little from the hip there, as there is — as you note above — an interesting backstory here (and, hopefully, some useful future action). However, I judged that a failed effort to influence policy in one country (admittedly an important one) was too much detail for the page. To be sure, there's lots of information on the page that over-complicates the narrative on ocean acidification. If you'd still like to include this information, it seems like it could go in the subsection above on reducing CO2 emissions. And it could probably do with some framing that better explains why it is a significant addition — I certainly read it as a minor effort to try to alter policy (e.g. the page on the organisation bringing the petition doesn't mention it). Sorry, again, if I appeared a bit brusque — I need to remember to not bite new editors. Best regards, --P LUMBAGO 07:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Plumbago... clearly I'm new at this...I'll follow your suggestions and take another stab at it... best Docdonn (talk) 19:50, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Plumbago... I wanted some advice... if you're not the right person, I'd appreciate you pointing me in the right direction... I'd like to add  a section to ocean acidification about how multiple stressors amplify the effects on marine life, e.g., ocean acidification, warming and deoxygenation create trophic mismatches, there's been a lot research in the last few years on this, not just meta-analysis but this year some interesting mesocosm studies in australia... do you think a section in ocean acidification is appropriate (as OA is more widely known) or do you think it needs its own article?Docdonn (talk) 15:17, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


 * In general, my view is to try not to fragment articles, especially when a "daughter" article is likely to be relatively short. I appreciate that there's a lot of work going on about this (my last read-up on it was this article), but that's true of just about every scientific topic, and I expect that the essence of it can be distilled down to a section here. So I'd suggest focusing on this, and on what the main messages from the meta-analyses and mesocosm studies are. Hope this helps, --P LUMBAGO 09:40, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes! Thank you it does help ...I'll do an edit today... Docdonn (talk) 12:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Plumbago! I was attempting to add context to the upwelling citation because, following your same logic, it seemed misleading about OA because upwelling is a coastal phenomenon and the extremity of low pH is largely a biological oceanographic process determined by age of the water and amount of organic matter that has sunk and decomposed there. Recent ecosystem approach studies have revealed how much biological processes contribute to pH variability. This biophysical feedback in the system is a critical factor determining rate and direction of exchange with atmospheric CO2 to determine rate of pH change, so it is a critical component for understanding long-term anthropogenic acidification that doesn't receive much attention here. Biologically-induced deviations from atmospheric equilibrium have been observed in nearly all ocean ecosystems, especially those with high productivity. The work from Duarte et al make a clear, empirical case using shallow coastal ecosystems but there are examples from other more open-ocean/shelf locations that could be referenced if that is the focus of this article. Thanks for editing this page! CheeseburgerSmith (talk)


 * Hi CheeseburgerSmith. Just to say that I've replied to you on your own talkpage. I hope that's OK. —P LUMBAGO 14:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Your additions to Blade Runner 2049
From your recent additions to Blade Runner 2049, there has been an issue about plot length for this article and possibly you could trim parts of the plot summary to support keeping your additions. Plot length is normally limited to 400-700 words and has been exceeded several times for this article. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 15:04, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks - will see what I can do. --P LUMBAGO 15:05, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Is there an easy way to determine length? I could cut and paste into an editor, but perhaps there's something more straightforward. In any case, I've made a few trims to the text, and will try to make more. Cheers, --P LUMBAGO 15:21, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


 * There was a recent discussion on the Talk page to remove the Joi-character references as indirectly related to the actions which K makes in the film. When they were added recently, I think they put the article over 700 words. Since Joi is a special effects novelty in the film her presence in the plot summary could likely be trimmed further, and the associated actions attributed directly as being those of K. If you have a few more trims, I think they would be good to try in the article. ManKnowsInfinity (talk) 15:36, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Fair point. That would save a few words. My earlier edits probably went the opposite direction because I thought that the plot description was confusing around her character. I'll have a look again. Cheers, --P LUMBAGO 15:45, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Carbon Cycle
Hi Plumbago, I was reading the page on the carbon cycle, and read the talk part and saw that you removed something about the effect of over-fishing in the section "something fishy". It does look like the formulation was awkward, but I think the effect of over-fishing on climate is real. I have in fact explain the mechanism as I understand it below your comment. Can you shed some light on this? Thanks ThLB (talk) 15:40, 16 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi there. Erm, you might have to point me to what I've done — I can't see anything on fishing in the Carbon cycle article. Did you mean another article perhaps? Cheers, --P LUMBAGO 15:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Ah-ha. I see what you mean now. Sorry - I missed your reference to the talkpage. Anyway, I'm not sure that I can remember what I was going on about 10 years ago. However, I can check, and it looks like the material I removed was suggesting that if there were less fish, less CO2 would be taken up from the atmosphere. I removed it because (a) it was poorly sourced, and (b) the mechanism seemed rather speculative to me. I can imagine more fish = less CO2 taken up being a quite sensible (qualitative) alternative, for instance (i.e. more fish = more grazing pressure = less phytoplankton = less primary production = less CO2 uptake). But, equally, I can imagine other scenarios (i.e. more fish = more grazing pressure on zooplankton = less grazing pressure on phytoplankton = more primary production = ...). In any case, if there was a serious hypothesis here, I'd expect it to appear in the scientific literature rather than a website. However, this is perhaps exactly what you mean - in which case, bring on the sources. Thanks! --P LUMBAGO 16:23, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Elaine Herzberg
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Elaine Herzberg. —  IVORK  Discuss 00:27, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alkalinity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WOCE ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Alkalinity check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Alkalinity?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). 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) 09:23, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Ophiuchy Hotline - Thanks a lot!
Thanks for your help with the editing! Since English isn't my native language, I guess I was poised to make a lot of mistakes, so thank you for your help correcting them. Not A Superhero (talk) 23:13, 24 August 2018 (UTC)


 * No worries. Thanks for writing it in the first place! Cheers, --P LUMBAGO 06:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cyberun 1.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Cyberun 1.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:44, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cyberun title.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Cyberun title.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of The Sublimed for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Sublimed 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/The Sublimed& 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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Xen halflife 08 AYool.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Xen halflife 08 AYool.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:41, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mercenary III pic 1.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Mercenary III pic 1.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Gunfright title.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Gunfright title.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Sea surface temperature
Sea surface temperature has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:24, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lunar jetman title.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Lunar jetman title.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Phytoplankton
Hi Plumbago. I am curious why you deleted this section in the article on phytoplankton. Your edit summary claims it was a copy violation, even though the citation clearly identifies it as open access. Unless otherwise indicated, material on federal web sites, such as NOAA, is open access. Regards. — Epipelagic (talk) 02:01, 23 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Epipelagic. I looked at the source and the overlap with the text in the article wasn't good. It's not unmodified plagiarism, but the editor who added it almost certainly copy-pasted it from the article then made a few cosmetic changes. Also, although there's a solid source for the plagiarism (NASA), the ocean's role in Earth's oxygen cycle is routinely overblown. It's quite likely that the ocean is a net sink for oxygen rather than a net source (in part because it has to remineralise material added to it from the land). And, further, it's in completely the wrong place in the article. Ordinarily, I'd have de-plagiarised and re-positioned it in the article, but I think the perspective it presents is misleading about ocean oxygen. So for all these reasons, I figured the easiest way was to delete it without replacement. I hope that helps explain. Sorry if I've been a bit brusque here. Cheers, —P LUMBAGO 07:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, I agree with you about the routine exaggeration of the ocean's role in the oxygen cycle. However, as far as I am aware, no notable scientists have yet had the courage to write the long awaited review article that takes that position in a reputable journal. There are so many rapidly fluctuating and unstable microobial processes in the biological pump that predicting net outcomes, such as the gas exchange at the ocean surface, still seems in the lap of the gods. Until the awaited review article happens, NASA and NOAA are about as good as it gets for presenting a mainstream scientific viewpoint. If they can't get it right, even after Trumpian disruptions and distortions, then the matter is beyond anything you or I can remedy. I long ago gave up trying to present how things really are on Wikipedia, and just settle for the mechanical convenience of what seem to be "reliable" sources. However, I will not object if you remove the section again. Our life is short, as well as many microorganisms. Incidentally, editing open source and cited material is definitely not "plagiarism", an inflamatory term. Please moderate your language - you seem annoyed about something you are not really expressing. — Epipelagic (talk) 08:31, 24 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Epipelagic. Yes, "plagiarism" is a strong and probably unhelpful term — although, technically, this is what it is as there's no indication of Wikipedia's text being a quotation. However, it had been somewhat reworked, so that slight on my part was unnecessary. Regarding my annoyance, it's just about the oxygen cycle being overblown — I've rather had it with this persistent myth. If I wasn't so busy with other things in my work, I might think about having a go at that piece you mention (although I'm far from an oxygen specialist). Anyhow, in terms of going forwards, I'm going to default to not undoing my changes, but will moderate my behaviour if someone else does. I'd really rather Wikipedia didn't help promulgate myths, although I entirely understand where you're coming from re: presenting things as they really are. Thanks, in any case, for your intervention. With best regards, —P LUMBAGO 07:25, 25 June 2022 (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) 00:26, 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) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)