User talk:Oysteinp

Hi - please supply copyright information on this image page: Image:Skutterudite-structure-large.jpg. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for information and tags. Images without this information are subject to removal. Thanks, Vsmith 13:10, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You might also be interested in discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics linas 00:17, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you use {{GFDL-self}}, you are licensing the image for use under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. That allows them to be used on Wikipedia; it also allows anyone else to use them under the terms of the license, including commercially. You would always be attributed and reusers must include your copyright statement. You retain full copyright on your images and can use them however you wish in any situation. Superm401 | Talk 19:24, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see that structure factor is a requested article at Requested articles/Mathematical and Natural Sciences. I was planning to have a go at it myself but you may be better qualified. Alison Chaiken 02:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the vote of confidence :). I was planning to have a look at it at some point and I' try to get it done in the next couple of days. But if you want to do it go right ahead! O. Prytz 18:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi O. Prytz. I would like to ask you a request. It is good if you use an edit summary when you contribute, especially for big edits, or when you remove big chucks of text, like you did at Space group. Edit summaries are a way of documenting the changes in the history, and makes it easier for others to understand what you did and why. I hope you don't mind. :) Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind at all :). But as to the removal of screw axis and glide plane from the second part of the Space group article, I have commented on this on the talk page of the article. Also it was discussed on the talk page earlier. In the future I'll add an edit summary stating what I did and referring to the talk page if needed. O. Prytz 17:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You voted for Physical oceanography and this article is now the current Science Collaboration of the Month! Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article.

Thanks for uploading Image:Skutterudie-structure-small.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 20:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your concern is noted, and believe me I do not take the heavy-handed use of admin powers lightly. However, that was an abusively-used sock puppet of a user who is now banned, and he was exhorting people to vandalize Wikipedia. Under the circumstances, I think a revert was very reasonable. You should also be aware that although it is beneficial in general to treat talk pages as free speech zones, they are not—they exist to serve the Wikipedia project, a purpose that was being totally subverted by the user in question. -- SCZenz 18:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand even though I might not agree. -O. Prytz 19:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might like to join us at Physics/wip where a total re-write of the main Physics page is in progess. At present we're discussing the lead paragraphs for the new version, and how Physics should be defined. I've posted here because you are on the Physics Project participant list. --MichaelMaggs 08:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting Danras's black-holes-don't-exist diatribe yet again. His methodology is pretty clear now;

• Danras edits the article and inserts a contentious/fringe opinion.
• A_User reverts to the canonical, calling Danras's edit OR and requesting a reference.
• Danras reverts to his version, calling the original OR and requesting a reference!

I wouldn't be surprised that if you were to revert it more than twice, Danras would hit you with the three-revert rule...

I don't know what to do about the guy - he obviously has got it into his head that black holes can't exist (which is fine - he can believe what he likes) but has decided that Wikipedia is the place to inform the world. He won't debate the key point, that you can't put in OR, but instead points out what he doesn't like about the consensus picture and demands that all loopholes in current theory be explained to his satisfaction before he will allow them in. I've stopped arguing physics with him and now try to keep it entirely to procedure, where you don't need to know any physics to see he's wrong.--Oscar Bravo 12:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a good idea, and most editors would see that it's reasonable to ask for a reference on something like this. I'll make sure not to violate 3RR. :) O. Prytz 12:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You asked for comments about Electron Diffration at my talk page. I think it is a great article, but it can only get a B-rating as long as it is not a GA. The biggest problem with the article, IMO, is the lack of references. You need to cite your references more explicitly, ie. after an interesting point etc. write the pagenumber and name of your reference. Eg. the article mentiones the wavelength of diffrent SEM's and TEM, but it does not cite its sources.

Is it possible to write this in traditional exponential form: relative errors less than 10^-3, I mean where the number 3 is raised?

But besides these points, I think it is a great article, so just keep up the good work! Snailwalker | talk 16:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank's for the tips, I'll look into adding more references! O. Prytz 17:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'r welcome, I know how nice it is to get feedback on your work. I hope we will see an FA soon :-) Snailwalker | talk 23:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You received this message because your were on the old list of WikiProject Physics participants.

On 2008-06-25, the WikiProject Physics participant list was rewritten from scratch as a way to remove all inactive participants, and to facilitate the coordination of WikiProject Physics efforts. The list now contains more information, is easier to browse, is visually more appealing, and will be maintained up to date.

If you still are an active participant of WikiProject Physics, please add yourself to the current list of WikiProject Physics participants. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 16:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Skutterudie-structure-small.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oysteinp,

I'm writing to you regarding the Electron scattering stub you created on the 31st December 2005. I am a 4th year student at the University of Glasgow, and as part of my 4th year project I had to find an article on Wikipedia in need of improvement, writing, or expansion and implement a more effective article. The article I chose to improve upon was your electron scattering stub.

As the person who initialized the stub, it would be great to have your feedback on how it has grown over the last couple of months with my input. I am currently expanding the "Types of scattering" section, so it is a work in progress. Nevertheless it would be great to get your feedback, and maybe some background on what drove you to write the stub in the first place.

Thanks, IndianFace (talk) 21:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Very Bad Wizards is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Very Bad Wizards until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. RileyBugz^会話_投稿記録 19:25, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:01, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Image-Crystallography-sketch2.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

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.  ★  Bigr Tex 02:25, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Crystallography-sketch.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned image, a duplicate (fixed size, lower resolution) version was used on the uploader's user page. It was later superseded by File:Crystallography-sketch.png, which provided color-coding of the topics in the chart. Unlikely to have future encyclopedic use. WP:NOTWEBHOST

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  ★  Bigr Tex 02:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Crystallography-sketch.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned image used on uploader's user page. Unlikely to have future encyclopedic use. WP:NOTWEBHOST

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  ★  Bigr Tex 02:40, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ingvild Julie Thue Jensen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional article about a non-notable academic created with a conflict of interest by a self-disclosed professor of physics at the University of Oslo. This article serves no encyclopedic value and instead only acts as a résumé written by someone close to the subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]