User talk:RobbieIanMorrison

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Marek.69 ^talk 18:38, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! RobbieIanMorrison, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! — Music1201 talk 01:09, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Energy modeling, RobbieIanMorrison!

Wikipedia editor Kieranian2001 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Reviewed as part of Page Curation. It seems like good work. Perhaps an image or diagram would help develop the article.Kieranian2001 (talk) 12:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on Kieranian2001's talk page.

Learn more about

The article

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see

Hello RobbieIanMorrison, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Efficient energy use has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double
  inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners
  , for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is
  Wikipedia:Copy-paste
  .
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 19:13, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:Power-to-X. Thanks! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 02:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:Power-to-X. Thanks! Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 03:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Power-to-X, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to

create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation

if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:48, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a brief note of thanks for your edits to the article on Stevenson. Good to have skilled edits! Thanks again. Jamessmithpage (talk) 18:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that this title is a poor choice, and would be in favour of changing the article's name to "Energiewende in Germany". --Rhombus (talk) 09:10, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 17:33, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel kenneth: Hello. According to the EMMA project website, that documentation was supposed to have been released under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license. I have just emailed the project leader and asked them to add the necessary license notice to the PDF that I copied from. After that is complete, I will reinstate the offending material, together with a suitable in-line attribution. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 12:39, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Virtual power plant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battery. 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) 09:52, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at

Draft:German National Action Plan on Energy Efficiency. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited German Renewable Energy Sources Act, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bundesrat. 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) 09:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Energetický a průmyslový holding

added a link pointing to EPH

Schwarze Pumpe power station

added a link pointing to EPH

Vattenfall

added a link pointing to EPH

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Garchy was:

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

I don't mean to discourage you from editing and article creation in the future, rather, I'm hoping this helps clear out some of the issues with this article and why it hasn't (and may not ever) pass. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information nor a

passing without serious work being done

- and even then it's not a given.

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
  Draft:Open energy system models
  and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Garchy (talk) 14:42, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your interest in the mitigation argicle. Friendly questions.... what is a "well-designed" climate tax? Some would say a well-designed price on carbon is an oxymoron but I'm not one of them, personally. This isn't a climate denial challenge but a real question to avoid tags like "clarification needed" or charges of

Hello

NewsAndEventsGuy. You make a good point. First up, only The Guardian report and the abstract for the Nature Climate Change article are available free of charge. So I was not able to read the entire paper. But from the information available, the authors of the paper investigated a number of tax rates for different classes of food and a number of options to deal with the social equity issues that would arise from hiking the price of basic foodstuffs. Note that the tax is on food and not on carbon. The Guardian talks of an optimum tax arrangement to give the best combination of emissions reductions and health benefits. Anyway, I take your point that the phrasing is poor and should be improved. So I replaced "well-designed climate taxes" with "carefully designed taxes". Thanks for pointing this out. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 16:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

May I copy this thread (unless you do so first) to the article talk page? Once there, I'd be interested in an explanation how changing "well-designed climate taxes" to "carefully-designed taxes" avoids the issue I raised?

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello

NewsAndEventsGuy. Sure. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 18:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you. Widefox; talk 10:35, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Widefox. Thanks for letting me know you reverted an edit of mine. On reflection, the word "international" is sufficient. Editing Wikipedia is clearly a learning process. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RobbieIanMorrison, sorry for the template use, I normally revert but spotted it after fixing the dab page. Each entry has only one blue link. Regards Widefox; talk 11:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, there were multiple blue links on EED - fixed. I changing the target of eed. Regards Widefox; talk 12:04, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Widefox. Some of those multiple blue links were mine. Thanks for keeping me informed. I have edited several disambiguation pages in the past and your information will be helpful in the future. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 12:22, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RobbieIanMorrison. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you have added material to

Hello Diannaa. Clearly I need to either acknowledge the source in an associated commit message (for future reference because it is unfortunately not possible to alter a commit message) or rework the material so that it no longer constitutes a close paraphrase. I will opt for the latter and modify the text. The openmod-initiative wiki uses a CC BY 4.0 license so bringing material across to Wikipedia with its CC BY-SA 3.0 license is acceptable (but going in the reverse direction is not). Thanks for pointing out my mistake. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 00:29, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've already added the attribution for this. Attribution can be added with a dummy edit like I did in this example. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:35, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Diannaa. Thanks for that information. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 00:41, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Energy system (disam) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

I would like your opinion on my merger proposal since this is in your area of expertise. Please comment here. Thanks. Brian Everlasting (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Brian Everlasting. I added my thoughts on the merger proposal, as you suggested. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 19:50, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please resubmit the article when you are done with the changes. I suggest you don't remove the previous comments as reviewing without those will not be feasible. Devopam (talk) 11:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Devopam. I just left a message on your talk page in relation to this. The details are given there. But I would like to apologize again here for the confusion I caused. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 11:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was planning on reviewing your article. All in all it looks great, similar in quality to the final result of

Hello Garchy. Many thanks for the suggestion. I will have a look at this tomorrow. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Garchy. Much of the material in the introduction is a synthesis of material from the body of the article. The first two paragraphs don't lend themselves to specific references, in part because nobody in the field has published review papers yet. (One person I spoke to from the open_eGo project admitted that academic publishing has lagged substantially behind platform development.)

The more contentious claim of projects lobbying for better licenses is now backed up with a footnote and a reference to an interview. The claim that both code and data be made accessible is now referenced to DeCarolis et al (2012), who make that point in their paper.

Aside from that, I don't think there is much more I can usefully do. Thanks for the opportunity to make some improvements. Please proceed with your review. I look forward to the outcome. Best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 16:19, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking a look at the lead! I would have jumped in to help, but this is a subject matter I am entirely unfamiliar with. Overall, I definitely think this article can be moved to the mainspace at this point. Garchy (talk) 16:21, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Garchy. Thanks for your review. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 16:37, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Open energy system databases, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to

create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation

if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Garchy (talk) 16:22, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RobbieIanMorrison. It has been over six months since you last edited your

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TopCipher (talk) 08:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Topcipher. Thanks for the notification. I have copied the wiki markup to a text file on my laptop. So go ahead and delete the draft. The assessment of the reviewer who rejected the submission was correct. The draft will take a lot of work to get it into shape and that is not a priority for me at the moment. With best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 14:05, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RobbieIanMorrison: Appreciate your consideration! Thanks. TopCipher (talk) 14:56, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed your section in the Talk:Deutsche Bank page created in November 2016. I left a message earlier today in reflection to the recent developments. The outcome from the investigation and fallout might be worthy of its own section in the near future in relation with Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. So monitoring recent developments is important. Cheers. FunksBrother (talk) 05:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FunksBrother. I agree that the property investment loans by Deutsche Bank to President Trump, a four-times bankrupt, are notable, if only for their incomprehensibility. And that this lending may well end up playing a significant role in the Russian collusion investigation. But the topic is quite far outside my areas of interest and I won't be contributing much. But good luck with your editing. With best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 05:56, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RobbieIanMorrison. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Appreciation for your contribution about CCL-D to the Citizens' Climate Lobby Wiki entry SMartDE (talk) 21:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RobbieIanMorrison. 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)[reply]

Hej RobbieIanMorrison! Are you at COP too? Best, Jonas --Saippuakauppias ⇄ 01:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

COP24. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 07:50, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello RobbieIanMorrison, I saw that you are one of the authors of

Hi Gnom Thanks for letting me know. I just added my name. Are you aware of Hiltner (2018) and his nearly carbon-neutral conference (NCNC) model?^[1] There are inclusion benefits too with NCNC. With best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 10:29, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you, I will take a look! --Gnom (talk)

Hi again Gnom. The document is very sensible. One change I would consider is not using "shuttle" email for the discussion over days or even weeks, but rather a chat service (like Mattermost) and limit the period to say two days. Good luck. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 10:41, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you look at this change done on the page. I think that this information could be reverted as it is not connected with the topic of the page... Jirka Dl (talk) 21:23, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

talk page. Perhaps others will agree? Thanks for raising the issue. HTH. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 08:57, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Hi RobbieIanMorrison - this is exactly what I was thinking about - I tried to look the references in the paragraph - only start of the article is available - even if references are cited as English, they are in Swedish - there are continuous attacks on the page Greta Thunberg from the very beginning - look for the discussion page there - and this one looks also to be little bit similar (but probably much more close to reality) - there is a long explanation from Greta on her facebook page - "Ps I was briefly a youth advisor for the board of the non profit foundation “We don’t have time”. It turns out they used my name as part of another branch of their organisation that is a start up business. They have admitted clearly that they did so without the knowledge of me or my family. I no longer have any connection to “We don’t have time”. Nor does anyone in my family. They have deeply apologised for what has happened and I have accepted their apology." And maybe in this sense short information should be on the page. Jirka Dl (talk) 09:22, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Jirka Dl. Thanks for the update. I added the PS from Greta's facebook page to the talk page on school strikes. The level of abuse that Greta receives is concerning, that is not how we should treat each other. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 09:51, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RobbieIanMorrison - I added {{cleanup}} template to the page - I have not found better solution. Jirka Dl (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Jirka Dl. I usually favor some discussion before rolling back edits. The original author can at least see that their efforts were not summarily removed. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 10:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please recall that at Talk:Greta Thunberg, I caused chaos with a preliminary floating of the question "what if we merged" during the WDHT discussion. Today I gathered all the merge discussion in one place. After it was dead, you and I exchanged a single round of comments about edit conflict. Talking about having an edit conflict contributed nothing, so ... apologies for presuming... but I deleted that "noise". Everything you said about article content and merger is still there. I hope you don't mind, I'll restore it if you object. Have a great day!

NewsAndEventsGuy (Another merge conflict.) I personally would have left the traffic as it stood. In my view, the prospect of a merge is zero. But that should, of course, not preclude discussion. On the other theme, the WDHT text, I'm going to push WMF legal to establish child protection advocacy: that underlying issue cannot be resolved by random editors on specific talk pages. I am now of the view that European fundamental rights apply to wikipedia pages served into Europe and that WMF has a duty of care to act in the best interests of minors. They need to operationalize that duty of care. With best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 12:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Excellent! Taking those concerns to the real attorneys at the foundation is exactly the best thing that can be done with them. Thanks for (A) caring and (B) investing effort. I look forward to hearing about future developments. As for merge, of course its dead. I've already said four or five or six times that I was floating a feeler not making a proposal and even the feeler already returned results that a real proposal would be DOA. Moving on now....

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:37, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

NewsAndEventsGuy. For your information, I forwarded my concerns to WMF legal today and would expect to get a response in due course. I think this is a significant issue. With best wishes. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Great, thanks for doing that. Part of me assumes they keep a close eye on this and may already have concluded that existing policies are adequate. After all, you are approaching this from the desire to set a high bar to protect the kids (and good for you!). The attorneys job is (usually) to verify minimum compliance. I'm cheering for you, though I am not holding my breath in the meantime. Sorry to say, just trying to be friendly and realistic.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

NewsAndEventsGuy I'm sure I'll hear back from legal, so we'll see how that goes. Maybe you're right? Time will tell. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited YAML, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page String.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Robbie, could you help me? I just tried to read the article Quaid-e-Azam Solar Park and was shocked. According to the article, the solar farm must have been an utter failure of the worst kind. But after looking up the sources that should back those claims, I feel puzzled as they don't back those harsh criticism. In fact it seems as if an Wikipedia author has made up most of the criticism by himself or at least misquoted his sources such as making sourced factual statements about capacity factor or prices, but adding how inadequate, expensive or riddled with flaws everything is. It seems as if this [1]is the main source for all that bashing, but after reading it, I cannot comprehend how that article lead to all that harsh condemnation. Above all it seems to me that the author who has written that Wikipedia article is lacking knowledge about how PV works and what is normal. For example he seems to expect a solar power plant to work all around the clock, and because it doesn't, it has to be a failure. I've deleted a similar claim in the past [2], but it is still suggested. In fact, the article mentions that it only produces 18 out of 100 MW several times. And there are many other similar issues as well. Could you check that. As a non-native-speaker its difficult for me to describe all the issues and flaws there, and I don't think that I could provide a completely new article, which I think is needed. And as an Wikipedian who mostly writes in the German Wikipedia, I don't have the knowledge about all that quality control pages that exist here and would be firmly needed. Therefore I thought about you. I know you are an energy researcher, having the knowledge to correct that article, or at least can initiate the quality control processes. Thank you! Andol (talk) 18:22, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andol: will have a look tomorrow. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 19:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Andol (talk) 19:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Small update: It seems as if most of the controverial/manipulative edits (e.g. [3]) have been made by an user who has been banned due to similar behavior in other articles. And I have also just noticed that another user tried to rewrite the article yesterday after my comment here, though it seems mostly without sources, which is also not the way it should be done. Andol (talk) 13:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andol: thanks for the update. I will still have a look this evening. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 15:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andol: I read through the article and made some trivial edits. There seems to be quite a lot of commercial and political dispute, but I didn't find anything in the engineering content that I would object to. The recent changes you indicated seemed to have fixed those issues. Thanks for being vigilant. Beste Grüße! RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 21:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to hear that! Thank you for your help! Andol (talk) 00:20, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RobbieIanMorrison, I work for ADNOC and I recently posted an edit request on Talk:Sultan Al Jaber. I noticed that you are a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy, so I was hoping you would have an interest in implementing those straightforward edits. Thanks so much. CB at ADNOC (talk) 12:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CB at ADNOC. I don't have any background in conventional energy or even much background in emerging technologies. Nor any knowledge of the Middle East. My principle interests are the numerical modeling of systems and advocating for access to suitably licensed public datasets. So I don't think I can contribute in this particular instance. Best, RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 15:23, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RobbieIanMorrison: Your not baling out of Wikipedia perchance, are you? I know coi from experience that its a pain in the canker. scope_creep^Talk

@Scope creep: No chance — I'm way too addicted. ☺ I work on open data in my spare time as well: doi:10.5281/zenodo.6321004. Take care, RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 14:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed 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 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

It looks like you copied/pasted this from your draft at User:RobbieIanMorrison/sandbox/work in progress eW4bo3. What I propose is:

1. Moving User:RobbieIanMorrison/sandbox/work in progress eW4bo3 to Draft:Geniatech v. McHardy (this allows editors other than you to edit it; by convention, your sandbox is your own space and other editors will not revise text there uninvited);
2. revising Draft:Geniatech v. McHardy to conform to standard article format
3. moving Draft:Geniatech v. McHardy to mainspace article Geniatech v. McHardy;
4. trimming the text you added on Open source license litigation to a shorter summary; and
5. continuing to revise, clean up and extend Geniatech v. McHardy.

Any objection? I've long thought the McHardy litigation merited Wikipedia coverage. TJRC (talk) 01:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds excellent!

I ran the draft content past an open source law and technology community I belong to, so it should be reasonably accurate and capture most of the pertinent literature. Indeed I included the following sentiment when announcing the live version to that community: "Given the length, there may be some pressure to push this section out to a stand‑alone page and then include a precis in the parent page?" So no real surprises then. Just the speed of reaction! On a technical note, the live version was just a copy‑paste, so drawing directly from my user space stub is the correct thing to do. Finally, am happy to let someone else "create" the new article — it does not have to be under my username, if that is how it works?

I am willing to write the precis for the parent page too (particularly given my familiarity with the material).

Regarding that series of events from McHardy and his legal advisor, yeh, certainly notable and hopefully some lessons can flow from some added coverage too.

In case I need to ping @TJRC: please note my reply. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 08:56, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you had contributed to the Peter Kalmus page and wondered if you would be interested in writing about the app mentioned in the page: Earth Hero [4]. I can't because I used to be involved in the all-volunteer team. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cydparr (talk • contribs) 22:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cydparr. Can you tell me something of the software development and in particular the licensing arrangements. I am much more inclined to contribute here if genuinely open source. I could not see anything on the Earth Hero landing page covering the more technical aspects. Also, sorry for my slow reply but I have been on holiday. Best, RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow what a coincidence to visit this userpage today, happy birthday

Race To Oblivion (ネザーへのハイウェイ) (talk) 12:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	Barnstar of Balloons
	Thanks for adding your photo of a discarded balloon to the relevant section of Balloon. It's a great image for illustrating the problem. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing: many thanks. I have about six such images of different spent balloons in my private photo library. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 07:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add irrelevant content at Canadian (canoe) that is not related with the byname 'Canadian' for canoe and already covered on the other pages about Canoe and Canoeing on Wikipedia. Kanoniem (talk) 10:35, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kanoniem: Could you explain please? Is there some special definition of "canadian" in this context that I am not aware of. I thought that image particularly relevant on two counts. It shows what I understand to be a canadian canoe used for touring and loaded with camping equipment. And it shows an aluminium construction. Perhaps this discussion might be better on the talk page? Regards, RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 10:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see "birch bark" construction .. but is that really the case? My photo looks like a "descendant" to me. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 10:50, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page about

Seltzer for carbonated water. Photos or drawings must above all support the text present in order to illustrate what is stated in the text, so that one can see what you are writing about. A loaded aluminum touring canoe is not illustrating anything here, except it is just an example of a canoe that is also called a canadian canoe by many people. But so are all the other canoes on this page. Kanoniem (talk) 11:02, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@Kanoniem: Thanks for the explanation. I cannot say I fully understand. But there is a page on canoe camping and I will head over there instead. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 11:20, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Canoe_camping is the right place for such an illustration. Also I agree this is a subject that can take some time to understand, especially when you are living in Germany (or the Netherlands, as I do.) Kanoniem (talk) 11:27, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 11:45, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RobbieIanMorrison! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Just Stop Oil several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Just Stop Oil, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 18:04, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add onto this that you're now at 3 reverts, plus the original addition. Please do not revert again per

WP:3RR. — Czello ^(music) 18:11, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

To note that I did try twice to engage. First on the users Talk page and then on the article Talk page. In latter case, my adversary, if you like, rolled back without engaging. It has been difficult to sift through the issues in such circumstances. These exchanges have been very legalistic and I guess I need to accept that that style of interaction will sometimes occur on Wikipedia. Only very latterly did the other editor engage sensibly. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 18:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed 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 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]