User talk:BD2412

This user prefers to communicate on-wiki, rather than by email.

Status: Active. bd2412 T

Dispute resolution clause: By posting on my user talk page, you agree to resolve all disputes that may arise from your interactions with me through the dispute resolution processes offered within the Wikipedia Community. BD2412

Archives

By topic (prior to June 1, 2009):

Articles-1st/Deletion-1st-2d/Law-1st-2d-3d-4th-5th

Misc.-1st-2d-3d-4th/RfA-1st-2d-3d-4th/Tools-1st-2nd-3rd/Vandalism

Dated (beginning June 1, 2009):

001-002-003-004-005-006-007-008-009-010-011-012-013-014-015-016

017-018-019-020-021-022-023-024-025-026-027-028-029-030-031-032

033-034-035-036-037-038-039-040-041-042-043-044-045-046-047-048

049-050-051-052-053-054-055-056-057-058-059-060-061

Coming here as you are the most experienced user I have interacted with. Hoping you can point me to a tool that can search edit summaries. I am looking at a sock farm and they are using the same edit summary (an uncommon one) for their edits. But, I want to check and see if there are any other accounts using the same. CNMall41 (talk) 01:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41: Interesting challenge. I am not familiar with a tool to do this (never having needed to make such a query myself). I would recommend asking at WP:VPT. BD2412 T 01:14, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicodemus D. Wernette, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

BD2412 T 03:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Is there any reason New Jersey is still listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/United States judges and justices, or are the justices from those states completed? Looks like the only one left in that section is a bluelink. Staraction (talk | contribs) 04:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Staraction: Good catch, New Jersey is clearly done. BD2412 T 13:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forest D. Siefkin, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting 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. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

BD2412 T 17:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have no issue with your edit, but the edit summary doesn't seem to match the actual edit here. Is it confused by the change from "pp" to "protection padlock" perhaps? Fram (talk) 08:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AWB automatically generates an edit summary based on the changes in the initial edit window, some of which I manually removed before saving the edit, but quixotically does not include its own automatic general fixes, such as substituting direct calls to templates. The substantive edit here is changing "Global Peace Index,Belgium is" to "Global Peace Index, Belgium is", with the correct space after the comma before Belgium. That might be an issue to take up with those who maintain AWB, but this is, I think, the first time anyone has actually noticed this. BD2412 T 14:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that thread went off the rails. Apologies for my initial response, which may have set the tone. It is helpful for those of us in a niche space to hear what topics regular (i.e. not-in-our-niche) readers are interested in. So keep those types of posts coming. I'm generally happy to put in a bit of time to clean up an article if I know there will be at least one interested reader. Will actually put TNIK on my list and get to it soon (if someone at WT:MED doesn't beat me to it). Best, Ajpolino (talk) 16:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's no problem at all. I can see the argument for not having an article for every gene, but at the very least we should have articles for genes for which possible therapies have advanced into later-stage clinical trials. I'm sure every gene in the genome has some one doing experiments on it, but not all that many will prove fruitful enough to continue to that stage. BD2412 T 16:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least we should have articles for most everything that is well-covered in reliable sources. In molecular biology, there's tons of easy-to-access source material that has not made its way into Wikipedia. I imagine this is true of other niche fields as well, though I wouldn't really know.

Not that it really matters, but I'm quite sure not every one of the ~20,000 human genes has some one doing experiments on it, for good reason. Some particularly important genes have thousands of people doing experiments on them (p53, AMPK, EGFR (gene), HER2, and more -- each with over 20,000 papers mentioning them in the title/abstract in Pubmed). It's funny the field is large enough to produce tens of thousands of annual grant applications, hundreds of thousands of papers, and yet just a few Wikipedia editors. Not sure how to meaningfully improve that pipeline. Perhaps just keep complaining until AI takes over the writing, as you alluded to.

Anyway, sorry to hear when your curiosity called, our article wasn't ready to answer. Hopefully we'll do better next time. Ajpolino (talk) 17:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello BD2412, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha Beta Chi was locked for creation in 2007. We've got a discussion and have an English and Spanish speaking editor on WT:FRAT who has likely pulled enough together to recreate. Could the creation lock please be removed?Naraht (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Naraht: Per Wikipedia:Solicited administrator actions, I do not respond to specific requests for administrative action. I would recommend making a request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. BD2412 T 19:30, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair, this would mean singlehandedly overriding an AFD, I guess. 2007 vs. Last week doesn't matter.Naraht (talk) 21:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying why the person making the guess (the guesser) was mentioned and bolded in the lead, I hadn't considered that. Wouldn't it be regarded as one of the "obvious close variants" of the verb under WP:RSURPRISE, though? Belbury (talk) 12:11, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would err on the side of inclusion in this case, as guessing is one of the more basic concept and the reader looking it up might therefore be more at the level of basic concepts. BD2412 T 14:37, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]