Spacepotato

I'd seriously like to know how it broke the rules.. they only state that he can only carry himself & I item IN the boat, and as even an infant knows that a goose swims, its actually obvious, especially as he is a farmer, that he would tether the goose to the outside of the boat & let it swim across.. its not my fault that I came up with a way simpler answer than you did, so why not leave my answer on the page, to allow dialogue on this subject?

mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mowglinova (talk • contribs) 00:49, 18 January 2014‎

 Template:Starbox 2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia.

I noticed an article you worked on. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

• dates
• years
• commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
• common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

This applies to infoboxes, too.

Thanks, and my best wishes.

Tony (talk) 08:32, 13 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

please, it hurts my eyes.

Hey, I see you're into space stuff. You might wanna check out my new wikiproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Cosmology. Thanks Tetra quark (talk) 02:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

please stop. Saying "Earth" is enough, and it is not wrong, so there is no reason to revert it Tetra quark (talk) 04:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

This issue should be discussed at Talk:Earth rather than here. Also, neither "it hurts my eyes" or "it is better this way" are substantive arguments. Spacepotato (talk) 21:30, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please beware of WP:3RR. I know you mean well but until there is an established consensus let's try not to clutter the page history and get everyone all worked up. This is all very trivial, anyway. Clearly the talk page discussion is going to need closure to settle the matter. — MusikAnimal ^talk 05:46, 9 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Two things to work on:

• The article tacitly says this is named after someone named Buchstab. Who is that? The article doesn't say.
• No other articles link to this new article.

Michael Hardy (talk) 21:28, 15 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

It's named after Александр Адольфович Бухштаб [1] who has an obituary at doi:10.1070/RM1991v046n01ABEH002726. Spacepotato (talk) 07:16, 16 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect American Spanish.. Since you had some involvement with the American Spanish. redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mikeylito^TALK  16:56, 10 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

 

The article LP 658-2 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. Not visible to the naked eye, not in a catalogue of note to amateurs, not discovered before 1850, and no significant coverage in studies. Being the 8th closest white dwarf isn't enough for a standalone article, as it's not within 20 light-years.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. StringTheory11 (t • c) 04:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Category:Redditors, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nymf (talk) 09:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Spacepotato. I'm in the long overdue process of merging {{Starbox 2}} into the various templates {{Starboxes}} as per this incredibly old discussion. I noticed that you have used this template in your user space at User:Spacepotato/Starbox example and User:Spacepotato/Albireo. Are you still using those pages? This particular conversion is a bitch to do. If possible, I'd appreciate it if you either updated the examples with the current versions in the main space or removed the {{Starbox 2}} templates in some other manner. It would save me at least a half hour, maybe more. If not, I'll convert them sometime soon. Thanks! ~ Rob^Talk 03:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I disabled the use of {{Starbox 2}} on these pages. Spacepotato (talk) 04:13, 3 September 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) 13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

For your work on virus classification! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:49, 26 November 2015 (UTC).Reply

 Template:ARICNS link has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:19, 5 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello Spacepotato, you changed on 11 August 2008 the parallax of Proxima Centauri from 771.99 to 768.7 mas and hence the distance from 4.224 to 4.243 ly and Wikipedia retains this value in the article of the star up to now. But the discoverers of Proxima Centauri b still use 4.224 ly for the distance of the star (and therefore in the wiki-article of the planet that value is given). Of course this is only small difference, but it is nevertheless interesting. Are there conflicting measurements? --Fb8cont (talk) 09:11, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

There are a number of recent measurements:

1. 772.33±2.42 milliarcseconds (original Hipparcos catalogue, 1997, VizieR I/239)
2. 771.64±2.60 milliarcseconds (revised Hipparcos catalogue, 2007, VizieR I/311)
3. 768.7 ±0.3 milliarcseconds (Bibcode:1999AJ....118.1086B, Table 7; using the Hubble Fine Guidance Sensor 3)
4. 768.13±1.04 milliarcseconds (Bibcode:2014AJ....148...91L, Table 1; the RECONS project)

The last value, #4, is the one currently in the Proxima Centauri article; it was placed in this edit on 3 Sep 2015. Spacepotato (talk) 02:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

stars math virus

 

Thank you for quality articles about stars, astronomers and mathematicians, such as Murray S. Klamkin, Andrew M. Gleason, GRW +70 8247 and Capella, for work on List of virus species and categories, for creatung hundreds of meaningful redirects, - you star, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 21 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Two years ago, you were recipient no. 1885 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 21 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LP 658-2 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/LP 658-2 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. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:31, 26 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on E. C. Stoner (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 16:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Spacepotato. What do you think of muslimheritage.com as a source? I found your User:Spacepotato/Examples of source inaccuracy (muslimheritage.com). The RSN discussions aren't very detailed or conclusive, and the organization behind the site, FSTC, seems wanting. --Ronz (talk) 18:06, 6 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Componentbox end has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 14:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi Spacepotato, Thanks for creating 2020 Kenai Peninsula mid-air collision. In the future when you create a new aircraft related article, could you please add it to Wikipedia:New articles (Aircraft)? This will help the article to get more exposure. Thanks! - Samf4u (talk) 15:55, 7 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

The article CoolBrands (branding initiative) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indications of notability, looks like advertising/promotion

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. HighKing⁺⁺ 16:22, 2 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

You removed a paragraph from the page on BiblioBazaar, claiming that it was a scam. Please reconsider this choice. While there is no legal issue with reprinting public domain material, BiblioBazaar has been printing material under copyright or claiming a public license that did not exist. This Wikipedia stub is grossly inaccurate and promoting a pirate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.64.91.142 (talk) 06:25, 21 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

 Template:ErrorBar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect ʻAʻā and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 27#ʻAʻā until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jay (talk) 20:17, 27 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Category:HR objects has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:40, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect Gru (Despicable Me) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 18 § Gru (Despicable Me) until a consensus is reached. ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 12:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

The article Bit Rate Reduction has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The subject (and its accompanying content) is not notable due to lack of coverage (significant or passing) in reliable secondary sources.

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. CascadeUrbanite (talk) 06:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Starbox short sources has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on Nesbah, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. gobonobo ^{+ c} 07:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:14, 21 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Template:AsymmetricErrorBar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:56, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

Category:Fictional populated places in Mexico has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have nominated White dwarf for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the 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" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)Reply