User talk:PointOfPresence

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Paul peters.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Paul peters.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file licensed as "for non-commercial use only", "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only", or "used with permission"; and it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
 * state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
 * add the relevant copyright tag and if necessary, a complete fair use rationale.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society
Hi PointOfPresence,

I noticed the edit you made to the above article, and after some research i think it would seem that Journal des sçavans is just a tad older. Citation 2 which you referred to seems to claim that the first magazine came out on 6 March 1665, while this source claims that the Journal des sçavans was first published on January 5, 1665. As both sources seem reliable and very specific about publishing dates, i would say that our verifiable information seems to suggest that Journal des sçavans is just a tad older. I added the source i mentioned to the article, and reinstated the old version. Kind regards, Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 10:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi


 * Yes, I completely agree that JDS is older. This is not in question. My point is that Phil Trans is the first journal devoted exclusively to science. That is why I made the edits I did. If you look at the ref no.1 in the JDS wikipedia entry, you will see that this is explained. Reference 2 in the Phil Trans article also bears this out, so I think it is clearly a matter of fact.


 * Thanks PointOfPresence (talk) 10:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, the old version seems to do a better job explaining this, as i can imagine there might be some confusion regarding the wording as not everyone may take immediate notice the "exclusively devoted to science" part. The previous version seems to acknowledge that it is the oldest "Scientific only" publication in the world, while also addressing the fact that Journal des sçavans is older - yet not entirely dedicated to science. I would say that the latter is relevant to the article as well as there seem to be some conflicting opinions about it. How about leaving both in with the reference i added? It is not conflicting information - only additional context to the "Oldest scientific journal" question. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 10:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello again. Thanks for your constructive attitude here. I agree that your addition of ref 1 is a good one. My ref 3 also makes the same point that Phi Trans was solely devoted to science, whilst JDS was clearly quite a diverse journal. Given that not everyone reads the references on wikipedia, I would still quite like to see the article point out that JDS was not really a science journal in the same way. I think it is only fair to explain the pivotal role of Phil Trans in the history of science (establishing the key principles of scientific priority and peer review). Would you be happy with that? PointOfPresence (talk) 11:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * May I suggest the following wording?
 * The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (Phil. Trans.) is a scientific journal published by the Royal Society. It was established in 1665, making it the first journal in the world exclusively devoted to science and it has remained in continuous publication ever since. The slightly earlier Journal des Scavans can also lay claim to be the world's first science journal, although it contained a wide variety of non-scientific material also.PointOfPresence (talk) 11:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Fine with me, it discusses the claim both magazines have to "Being the oldest" and points out the difference between them which makes each claim slightly different. With both references added i see no issue whatsoever in the wording - expect the addition of also at the end perhaps - may i suggest replacing that with "as well"? Note that if you do not agree it is not an issue that needs discussing - i am satisfied either way. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 11:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Royal Society
Hey dude. I've reverted your inclusion of the Charles II medal, just because it's formatted differently from the others and unreferenced. Can I suggest writing a list on it, using this as an example? Ironholds (talk) 06:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * An additional list is the appropriate thing, really (unless it's a one-off award?); you'll note that not all the medals are mentioned in the article. Still, if you can reference the award correctly I guess we could include it. Ironholds (talk) 13:46, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If the information is available on your website (as the others are) I can churn out a WP list; if not, get somebody to post a list on the RS website and I'm happy to churn out a WP list similar to the others. Ironholds (talk) 11:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Brilliant; I'll get on to that in a tick. Ironholds (talk) 16:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * By the way, could you email me the contact info for whoever we should speak to about possible RS contributions to Wikimedia? The British chapter is looking to form links to cultural institutions, particularly for the purpose of encouraging such organisations to put more content into the public domain (or let us get our grubby mits/scanner on it for the same purpose). Ironholds (talk) 23:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I know; I wrote it :P. What I mean is; you'll notice that all other RS medals have their own dedicated lists which display winners, data, rationales, etc, and link to that page. I'd look to do a similar one with the Charles II medal. Ironholds (talk) 15:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Chelsea Userbox
As with all my football club userboxes, the name of the club is already in bold text. Putting it in capital letters as well seems redundant and not as visually appealing IMHO. Cheers! -- Blue Squadron  Raven  04:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Triplestop
Triplestop has not edited for several months; I'm not sure if he'll ever be back. It might be a good idea to ask someone else to help with the Cyclosportive article.  — Soap  —  12:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Ping
Mind emailing me? Long story ;p. Ironholds (talk) 13:39, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Just looking to poke you vis a vis a WMUK collaboration with your employer - however, thanks to a lovely webmaster at the Society, it's now gone ahead :). Ironholds (talk) 05:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Open Biology


The article Open Biology has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Not-yet-existing journal that will be launched at some future date. Article creation premature, does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Crusio (talk) 11:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit war warning; WP:VERIFY
WP:V is not optional. If content you add is challenged, you need to add a source or discuss on Talk.

Your recent editing history at Synthetic rubber shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 18:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 15)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KGirlTrucker81 was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:PointOfPresence/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:PointOfPresence/sandbox Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KGirlTrucker81&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:PointOfPresence/sandbox reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KGirl (Wanna chat?) 17:50, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 18)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DrStrauss was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:PointOfPresence/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:PointOfPresence/sandbox Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DrStrauss&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:PointOfPresence/sandbox reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 Dr Strauss   talk   22:26, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paul Harvey Peters has been accepted
 Paul Harvey Peters, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!  DGG ( talk ) 02:48, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Paul_Harvey_Peters help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Disambiguation link notification for May 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Go (game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deep Mind ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Go_%28game%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Go_%28game%29?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) 09:27, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

R v Dudley and Stephens
Hi PointOfPresence. The spelling "judgment" is correct when referring to an English criminal case. It's a legal exception to the usual spelling "judgement" which is used more generally. MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:29, 13 November 2019 (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) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Richard Cogdell


A tag has been placed on Draft:Richard Cogdell requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://royalsociety.org/people/richard-cogdell-11245/?commitee=https%3A%2F%2Froyalsociety.org%2Fabout-us%2Fcommittees%2Fnewton-international-fellowships-committee-biological-sciences%2F. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. S Philbrick (Talk)  14:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

email
Can you turn on your email option so I can send you the draft? S Philbrick (Talk)  12:57, 3 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Apologies. Didn't realise it was off! Fixed now. Thanks for your help. Point of Presence  talk  12:59, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ S Philbrick  (Talk)  15:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

PRS usage with former presidents of the Royal Society
I don't think you're correct in your belief that former presidents of the Royal Society lose the postnominal PRS. I can find plenty of evidence to the contrary. For example, the Royal Society's website lists Sir Isaac Newton as 'Sir Isaac Newton PRS FRS' (same for e.g. Christopher Wren). The Royal Society Publishing website also lists the first president as PRS. If you would be so kind as to self-revert your many changes to replace PRS -> FRS, that would be great. Many thanks — Jumbo T (talk) 16:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi there. I am the Publishing Director at the Royal Society and I checked this with both the Executive Director and the Head of Library and Archives before making the changes. Thanks for pointing out the issue on our website - I clearly need to get this fixed! (incidentally, Debrett's Peerage says that PRS is only used within the Royal Society - we don't go quite that far. Thanks. Point of Presence  talk  16:37, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the response. Clearly you know better than me in this case :)
 * By the way, for transparency, I'd strongly advise you to disclose your conflict of interest with the Royal Society on your user page. Happy editing — Jumbo T (talk) 18:12, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That's a good suggestion as I quite often edit articles relating to the Society, our Fellows or our journals. Point of Presence  talk  19:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

About Draft:Richard Cogdell
Jay and Sphilbrick: could you possibly look this draft's Talk page and address PointOfPresence's comments about issues raised there? PointOfPresence, while you may well be the publishing director of *the* Royal Society en.wp content is moderated by mostly faceless unimportant drones, and a good example of one them would be, well, me. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi. The draft is now an article, so the issues have been resolved. Thanks Point of Presence  talk  10:47, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Replied there. Jay  💬 11:04, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I note that Talk:Richard Cogdell has yet to be created.--Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 12:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't want to move Draft talk:Richard Cogdell as the target talk, since that talk was specific for the draft page. Jay  💬 12:25, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Historic Paris churches
Thanks very much for catching my oversight of two important churches. Ive added St Sulpice and will add St. Eustache shortly. Best wishes, SiefkinDR (talk) 20:23, 1 April 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) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)