User talk:PrometheusOne

Welcome to Wikipedia, but please do not cut and pase copyrighted material into the 'pedia. Cheers, Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 12:25, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Prometheus1, it looks OK. I'm sure Duncan meant well (we do get a lot of cut and pastes) and he may have inadvertantly found something that contained keywords in your text and saw that you were a new user (most copyvio's come from new users) and jumped a bit fast. I have restored your text. --Lexor|Talk

Yeah, sorry. I googled one of the phrases and it came up; it seems by chance. Nice article, btw. Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 16:23, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * By the way, are you by any chance connected to the User:Prometheus? If you have lost your password, I think it can be reset.  That way you keep all your contribs together.  Cheers. --Lexor|Talk 12:55, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * no im not the other prometheus

I fixed the problem on DNA repair, the problem is that you started the line with a space. Whenever you start the line with a space, it will format the rest of the line (and paragraph) as   formatted text, this is to allow for verbatim ASCII art the be included inline, like this:

++ | a box with text   | ++

You need to read How to edit a page, see towards the bottom of the table it describes what happens when a line starts with a space. Cheers, --Lexor|Talk 14:09, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Also, could you please put add information regarding the copyright status of the images you contributed to their image pages: Image:Dnarepair1.jpg and Image:Dnadamage.jpg. I see that they have (C) Copyright Prometheus 2004 (which I assume is you), even if so, you need to indicate what license you are contributing the images under, otherwise it defaults to copyright to you (we recommend the GFDL, but you can dual-license under other licenses such as the Creative Commons) See Image copyright tags, Copyrights and Copyright FAQ for more. --Lexor|Talk 14:09, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Prometheus,

Just a comment. You might not realise how harsh your replies to User:Shibboleth sound. Remember, just about everyone here is a volunteer working towards the same goal - to make a really good free encyclopedia. I understand that it doesn't always feel that way when someone criticises an article that you have put a lot of effort into.

There are a number of issues here, but first up let me say that as a scientist, I think the article on DNA repair is an excellent addition to Wikipedia, particularly the graphics (see below). However proposing an article on Featured article candidates is specifically intended to illicit critism, usually objections, with a view to improving an article. If you check the archive of previous candidates, you will see that by far the most common objection is that "the writing could be improved". Sometimes I think there is too much emphasis on writing style, but it often correct. I'm sure this is all that User:Shibboleth was saying.

The intention behind featured articles often seems to get confused (and I'm not totaly certain what they are myself). I suspect many people want FA status to try and get an article on the front page, but that is only one of the side effects. I'm sure you've read the guidelines at What is a featured article. I think the intention is best summarised as "hey look at this featured article, if more of Wikipedia's articles were like this it would be really good". But that isn't to say that every article should be like that. In particular it may or may not be a good idea to simplify the writing in DNA repair. It could be a better idea to keep it somewhat technical to preserve accuracy and detail, but then we wouldn't be able to point to it as a featured article and say "hey everyone write like this" because most people won't be able to. -- Solipsist 08:36, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Hello again Prometheus - It looks like User:Shibboleth is happy to roll back the discussion on Featured article candidates. Its really a job for a sysop, so do you have any objection if I ask User:Raul654 to move the discussion over to your talk pages here, and replace Shibboleth's 'object' with one from myself as outlined above? -- Solipsist 20:33, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi again,

Just another note about the images on DNA repair (which look really good). Someone else on Featured article candidates has commented about clarifying the copyright attribution on these images. Its perfectly OK to upload images with copyright restrictions as long as the licensing is clarified on the Image description page, preferably with one of the templates in image copyright tags. Personally I tend to prefer some of the Creative Commons licenses.

However, I have seen some discussion elsewhere on Wikipedia, that the copyright and licensing of the majority of images is considered a significant problem for the GFDL status of Wikipedia itself, particularly with respect to possible print version. I've even seen one person say that it is possible that all images which are neither GFDL nor public domain could be deleted some time in the future. -- Solipsist 08:52, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikibooks
Hi Prometheus1. I feel that with only a little more editing that the current version of DNA repair should be a FA (and is within the scope of wikipedia), but what I was thinking was that if you wanted to expand the article even further and make it even more detailed, you could do it on the sister project. This might also be a possible resolution to the discussions on FAC, since a detailed article on DNA repair (i.e. non-"dumbed-down") would be 100% and entirely within the scope of wikibooks. This way, we could keep a somewhat less technical encyclopedia version at DNA repair and cross-wikilink with the as-technical-as-you-want-it version at DNA repair. Just a thought. That way people interested in more details can easily access it. Cheers, --Lexor|Talk 11:31, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

DNA repair copyright issues
Prometheus - I've been asked to look into the DNA repair FAC nomination. I'm the guy who (sorta) runs the Featured article candidates page. The objections fall into two categories - copyright issues and the use of technical jargon. Since there's a lot of touchy feelings centered around the latter, I'm going to totally ignore it (at least for the time being) and instead work with you to resolve the copyright issues. There are three pictures on that page (very nice ones, too). On the image page for each of them (such as Image:Dnadamage.jpg) there should be information on the source and copyright status/license. (for an example, see Image:Coral sea.jpg). Could you fill this information in? It shouldn't take you more than a few minutes, and it would help the FAC nomination greatly if you did. Also, if you made those images yourself, the copyright tag in the picture itself should be removed and placed on the image page instead. &rarr;Raul654 20:11, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * With respect, if I have the term "jargon" - which means pretentious and meaningless language - applied to this article once more, I will simply withdraw it and be done with it. Cheers. prometheus1 23:48, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Prometheus, thanks for updating the image copyright information. You say reproduced permission from the author (presumably you), but that doesn't indicate what redistribution status the image has.  If you want to license the image under the same license as your text (i.e. the GFDL), then you can simply include the tag  in the description page, otherwise it is not clear whether third-parties can redistribute the image.  You can also choose from a number of other licenses (see Image copyright tags), but the GFDL is the simplest.  --Lexor|Talk 10:12, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you for tagging the images. Another point, however - you say to credit the author of the images, but you don't say who that is. &rarr;Raul654 19:10, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Hi Raul654, Prometheus1. Technical copyright matter here. Prometheus, would it terribly hurt you to licence those images under GFDL? Note that you retain your copyright when doing so. The wikipedia generally would benefit from images which are either GFDL or GFDL compatible whenever we can. "free for non-commercial use" is not GFDL compatible, and should be avoided for new content if possible IMHO. Otherwise I think the article is most excellent indeed! (disclaimer: I'm a biologist :-P ) Kim Bruning 11:57, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thymine dimerism
Hello, clearly you are an expert on biochemistry (I am not!) and DNA (your page on DNA repair is nice!), I've added a bit on thymine dimerization as the cause of sterilization by UV light to the sterilization section of that page. Is it correct by you?--Deglr6328 07:30, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Redirects
Hello. Check out Redirect and learn a simple trick to take anyone who clicks on one title directly to another; no need to make a page saying to "see: (some other title)". Cheers, -- Infrogmation 03:53, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

DNA Repair image
Hi Prometheus,

Congrats on reaching FAC.

Like the new lead image, but I just wanted to make a slightly different comment on the other images. Various people have expressed concern about their copyright status WRT Wikipedia, but if Raul is happy with it now, it must be OK. However, you might want to check whether you can mark copyright under a pseudonym such as Prometheus. I'm not a lawyer, but it might be safer to mark them copyright 'Harold Brenner' (assuming that is correct). -- Solipsist 11:37, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * You have a point prometheus1 05:48, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Prometheus1. Thanks for changing that confusing sentence. Could you look at the picture entitled 'Poor DNA repair induces pathology'? Can you change 'senesence' to 'senescence' please. Axl 11:22, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Easier said than done. But it is time for an update on that image. Thanks for pointing it out! prometheus1

Evolution of diagnosis
Hi Prometheus, well done on this article. However, the title is rather unlinkable, and I would argue that "evolution" is not quite the word. These developments have been saltatory (e.g. with several revolutions). I'm merging it with diagnosis, which will probably strengthen both articles. Please discuss if you object. JFW | T@lk  15:43, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Diagnosis needs more work now.
 * Nothing to be affraid of. Perhaps we should merge in differential diagnosis as well. JFW | T@lk  11:20, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Lesch-Nyhan syndrome
hey there i'm currently using you damaged chromosome image for this article Lesch-Nyhan syndrome and i'm wondering if you could come up with anything better? --Larsie 23:24, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following images:


 * Image:Dnarepair.jpg
 * Image:Dna_damage.jpg
 * Image:Dna_repair.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License,  if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 04:04, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

DNA repair FARC
I see you haven't been around in a while, but on the off chance that you are still checking this page, you might want to know that DNA repair is currently a Featured article removal candidate. The objection centered around the lack of references, which I have mostly fixed in the text, as well as doing some rewriting/copyediting. However, there are no references for the two images you created, Image:dnadamage.jpg and Image:dnarepair1.jpg, and I haven't been able to track down sources that confirm every element in the pathways. Yes, this was from 2004, but if you see this and have those references handy, it would be very useful. Opabinia regalis 20:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of NeoSENS
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article NeoSENS, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Phenylalanine (talk) 16:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Survey request
Hi, Prometheus1 I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions. Thank You, BCproject (talk) 05:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC) -- Certainly. Please provide an email address. prometheus1 (talk) 11:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dnadamage.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Dnadamage.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Jordan 1972 (talk) 21:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dnarepair1.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Dnarepair1.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Jordan 1972 (talk) 21:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mygene, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 13:01, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Weightloss Complete package.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Weightloss Complete package.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 20:49, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Prometheus1. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Prometheus1~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mygene, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ACE. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:47, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

DNA repair Featured article review
I have nominated DNA repair for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  22:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)