User talk:Natureium/Archive 4

Thank you for alerting me that this page was speedily deleted. That was bull. The information was from college and university rankings wiki site. It was not advertisement and I never looked at the site they mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikecurry1 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Natureium. You

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).

Administrator changes

Justlettersandnumbers • L235

Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

Oversight changes

Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
• There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.

Technical news

• Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
• Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
• The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
• Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
• Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Taiwan stations). Legobot (talk) 04:30, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

hi, not need nations at 2018 asian para games transfer to draft. you can redirect all of them to 2018 Asian Para Games. it is recent events.Futsalmaniasa (talk) 18:24, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Natureium, If you can think of a better short description for any article, don't hesitate to make an improvement, just like with any other content. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 07:46, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Interface administrators. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

		The Not A Sock Barnstar
		For all your hard work in avoiding There'sNoTime's magic pixie dust. And making some edits which do actually deserve a barnstar. Nick (talk) 17:51, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

	The Surreal Barnstar
	For putting up with in-jokes, and actually being a good editor - 💖 18:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the more clear explanation. I have spent the last 10 years working with ELIZA tests and I ask you to consider a few things. The MDRES citation guidelines do not have a prohibition, but say "Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content." Plus, an article on the general meaning of an ELIZA is not truly medical by the letter of guidelines. Also, the other type descriptions have zero or one citation. I don't believe the patent citations are out of line in this case.

I also disagree that there are that many fundamental types of ELISA tests. There are many, many, many tests, but only an handful of fundamental types of tests. The "reverse" ELIZA is a very different type of an ELISA.

As for the advantage/disadvantage, I do understand your concern and agree that could be worded better. Though I do generally think that the current propensity to "always" have an opposing view sometime gets carried away and can provide a false sense of "equality" of opinions to an uninformed reader/listener.

If you have any concerns that I may be trying to "gin up business" I would hope I can put those to rest. The business is done. We are in the process of closing it down. The first and seminal patent has already reverted to the public domain due to non-payment of maintenance fees. The second will follow shortly. The only investor with any remaining interest is the State of Texas and they have very little. Over the last 10 years, the reverse ELISA was widely described (to our faces anyway) as a pretty serious breakthrough. I considered a sort mention in this article a suitable place for a record. I respect the obvious time and talent that you put into Wikipedia. But, I do ask that you reconsider your decision to delete the text that I added. Is there a middle ground? I will be happy to discuss further with you or anyone else. DCharbonnet (talk) 22:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

You are right that the other sections do not have sources. The abundance of unsourced material on wikipedia is a point of frustration for me. If you want to add this back to the article, I would recommend finding some neutral sources, perhaps some review articles that compare methods of ELISAs or protein quantitation. I did some googling to try and find more information about "reverse ELISA"s and I found a mention in the book "Comprehensive Toxicology" but was unable to access it, so this may be an option. ELISAs aren't strictly medical material, but they fall in the biomedical category that MEDRS applies to. Primary sources are discouraged on Wikipedia in general, but much more strictly enforced for biomedical material. Natureium (talk) 20:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I will do some research and get it as right as I can. DCharbonnet (talk) 01:20, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

My barnstar sort of kind of got shrunk in the dryer. But here you go:

*<--Barnstar

I'll get you a proper one next time.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:52, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I would be more creative except...it’s late and I’m tired. Anyways, thanks for your helpful quality contributions to Wikimedia, onwiki and elsewhere, as well as for not being a sock.

Vermont (talk) 01:59, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Natureium, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018^[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

• There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
• Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

• ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
• There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

• User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at

Would you mind taking a look at the warning banner on the article for Hedvig Hricak? It got placed in June of 2017, but the article as it stands now bears little resemblance to where it was then. Here's the diff for reference. Do you think it'd be appropriate to remove the COI template at this point?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Looks like all your edits have been via the talk page and the article is substantially different than when edited by the accounts listed in the talk page template, so I'll go ahead and remove it, as it should no longer apply to the article content. Natureium (talk) 12:03, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Why do you think my edits at Weill Cornell medical college-Qatar are violating? I am not stating personal opinion, but actually putting forward facts. These include their current ranking, I do not know why you keep removing this when it is indeed true and cited. I think adding its rank would provide more information to the reader about the institution's status. Moreover, the criticism I added is well known to the education sector in the state of Qatar. I believe it is your problem that you are not well updated about the topic you are trying to edit. Please put forward any questions you might have so that we can agree on an edit to the page mentioned above.

The FC Drita – managers that I created is a template, I created it because I wanted to make page of Drita more modernized, and I have a problem, how do I make a new template that i'am creating or I have just created to make it an actual template?

~Dardn2015~

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Administrator changes Sir Sputnik Kudpung • Liz • Lourdes Everyking • Jackmcbarn Interface administrator changes Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes AGK • Ivanvector • Stwalkerster • TonyBallioni Oversight changes Amorymeltzer • Oshwah • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93 Keilana

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
• A
  proposed deletion policy
  (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
• A
  today's featured article
  (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.

Technical news

• local talk page or on Meta
  . A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
• A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
• The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
• The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.

Brush border and the Striated Border have been mistaken. The content originally in Brush Border should be Striated Border. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaochitz (talk • contribs) 16:41, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

WP:MOVE. Pages should not be cut and pasted to change a title, because this leaves the edit history behind. Natureium (talk

) 17:29, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

While the MMR section makes over-the-top attacks any reports that dare to question the safety of his vaccine, anyone that attempts to question/correct some of the more unbalanced statements are at risk being blocked. Why is this? K y blogg (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking, but the article is written based on the information in

WP:MEDRS compliant sources. If you have an issue with this, I suggest the article talk page. Natureium (talk

) 21:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I agree with the recent removal of the image. It's hard to fathom that someone looking at this article would need a picture of a knife in order to know what a knife is. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 01:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Not challenging you, but removing links seems to be something that happens with VisualEditor. I've seen a lot of edits that are tagged "Visual edit" and remove links for no apparent reason, and it doesn't look intentional. You might want to be aware of this. Or not. ♫

Very strange. I'll look into that more. Thanks. Natureium (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Eds edits Zebrazebrazebra2 (talk) 01:57, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing New food processor, Natureium.

Unfortunately Barkeep49 has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

Unreviewing per consensus on not patrolling CSD tagged pages

To reply, leave a comment on Barkeep49's talk page.

Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello Natureium. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of New Money (2019), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: article can't be a duplicate of itself. Thank you. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 19:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC) Hmm, I must have messed that up with the toolbar somehow, because there are definitely 2 articles. Natureium (talk) 22:45, 2 November 2018 (UTC) Hi, I'm fine to have the New Money (2019) page deleted, as the film is actually a 2017 film and it's been duplicated. Would it be possible for you to change the title of the nigerian New Money (film) to New Money (2018 Film) so there's no confusion between the two titles? The American New Money film will be released this april. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosnopfl (talk • contribs) 18:25, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi Natureium. In the future, please report only the edits of a user at

Mz7, yeah, on second thought, that wasn’t a good idea. Natureium (talk) 22:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Are you serious? Do you really think someone who:

A. Appeared on 3 reality shows, 1 being a guest judge

B. Appeared in an award winning film

C. Appeared in 2 high budget music video with big name artists

D. Has over 300K followers on Instagram ALONE with 80K on twitter

You think that's not notable? Wrong. And I have told you A number of times that they deserve a wiki page and gave good sources and good spelling/grammar. And you've never acknowledged my points either, you just ignored me and unfairly removed the page after 3 people, three people voted, and now you're threatening to block me? How dare you. There is NO reason that page shouldn't be made. None. I suggest you stop what you're doing, let the page be and deal with it. You are in the wrong, not me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratherbe2000 (talk • contribs)

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Natureium,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

• Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the ANI discussion. Usually Wikipedia tries not to get our editors involved in off-wiki activities that might have repercussions even if that activity seems intended to benefit the encyclopedia. Especially if what is going on is to stop some kind of vandalism or disruption. The people who are best placed to undertake that would be the Arbitration Committee, but they are likely too busy and any request would go into a long queue. So I'd say let it go before trying to scold someone for disruption on a non-Wikipedia email address. (It might be different if you were trying to improve some article and you thought there was an expert who might help you who might not respond to WP email). There is also the

Hello, Natureium. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Thank you for being vigilant to reference spam. I sympathize with how maddening it is, that someone could do that and be so persistent about it. Keep calm and carry on! Jytdog (talk) 04:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I have suggested that the individual book articles of the series be merged into

Dear Natureium,

I actually don't understand the reason why a link to a page in which the Wiki user can compare the pH of one chemical to another similar one is not allowed to be published. This is one of the most important information scientists need prior to selecting the best buffer for their research. Looks like you are not from this field, and is just randomly blocking any link that you suspect to be spam.

There are other links that could be added instead, but just don't impede thousands of scientists to get easier access to this information.

https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/life-science/core-bioreagents/biological-buffers/learning-center/buffer-reference-center.html http://staff.ustc.edu.cn/~liuyz/methods/buffer.htm http://www.hopaxfc.com/en/blog/useful-ph-range-of-biological-buffers

I even linked some other Wiki pages of similar chemicals to HEPES page and they were all deleted. I honestly think it is hard to understand what is your purpose.

DanielMaia (talk) 02:37, 27 November 2018 (UTC)DanielMaia

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

Administrator changes

Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz

Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes

Deryck Chan

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
• A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
• A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news

• Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
• To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
• Since deployment of
  Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here
  .

Arbitration

• Voting in the
  2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page
  .

Miscellaneous

• In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
• Wikipedia policy
  two-factor authentication. A committed identity
  can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries

• Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as Raymond arritt on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CD3 and Translocation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

The common understanding of Wikipedia policies, as far as I am aware is to be descriptive, not prescriptive. I am just updating the page to document the current reality of the situation. Please restore the edit or show where the status quo ante is being enforced. Best. Crazynas ^t 17:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Something happening once does not make it a policy.The bureaucrat specifically cited WP:IAR. Natureium (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Actually the IAR is not what bothers me, it's the policy by fiat from ArbCom. Since this is one, very limited area where the is no other remit except for ArbCom, and except for the yearly elections they are a body of 'last resort' I don't see how this cannot be policy now. (Since ArbCom has set the precident that Good Faith is the only rationale needed to justify this without consequence). Regards, Crazynas ^t 17:27, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

(

village pump. Natureium's reversion was correct. Bradv

🍁 17:34, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

"ArbCom doesn't make policy." GMG^talk 18:02, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

That's a misreading of how the case concluded, I think. There were two findings of fact that each unanimously and unequivocally state the desysopping went against policy. That ArbCom didn't decide to punish the bureaucrat has nothing to do with policy. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

• While bureaucrats have the de facto technical ability to remove the administrative toolset, they do not possess the de jure standing to revoke an administrator's entitlement (which is granted by the community). –xeno^talk 17:47, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing Ale Jithendra, Natureium.

Unfortunately Insertcleverphrasehere has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

If you were not aware of the recent change, PRODed and CSD tagged articles should not be marked as reviewed, per recent consensus here Cheers,

To reply, leave a comment on Insertcleverphrasehere's talk page.

—