User talk:Edgar181/Archive5

RFA

I gladly accept the RFA. I think you wrote a nice review of my work. I will be answering the questions this weekend, thanks for the nomination! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Paneiro1122

Appears to be a sock of User:Paneiro, who you had blocked previously.--Rosicrucian 18:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This case is more complicated than I orginally thought. I blocked Paneiro as an apparent sock puppet vandal, but if the checkuser request doesn't confirm any connection to a previously blocked user, and if he's actually interested in good-faith editing, I'm open to unblocking and allowing Paneiro to edit with "time served" (using just one account, of course). I'll await the checkuser results before doing anything unless Paneiro1122 does anything obviously abusive. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Mountain Vista Governor's School

Hello, I am a MVGS parent and was looking at the Governor's school entry for VA and I created a page for MVGS when I realized it didnt exist. When checking the "what links to this page" I found that you had asked another sysop to watch that page. Apparently it was suffering vandalism before and it was apparently deleted bacause of it. Is it possible to get the page semi-protected. All the other Governors schools have pages as do a number of Virginia High schools. I will work with Dr. Williamson to see if we can get a designated person to maintain the page going forward. Thank you!

F-

Oops, just realized I wasnt logged in when I made this. Sorry.

Yes, the article existed until a few days ago. I was heavily vandalized by students from the school. But we don't delete article because of vandalism. It was deleted as the result of a discussion that concluded that the school did not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for inclusion. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mountain Vista Governors School. I'm not sure I agree with the result of that AFD, but the current article could be deleted again at any time because of it. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually I was unaware of all that going on. I would say that I am not sure I agree with it either. I am goin gto continue to update the page with additional content. I hope that it can be reversed because I would agree there are certainly less notable schools on the Wikipedia (trust me I went to several of the VA school pages and saw that). Is there a system to appeal it? Or should I just keep updating and see what happens. In the mean time what can be done to minimize the vandalism?

Sorry, I should have mentioned that deletion decisions can be appealed at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Since the article is subject to deletion again at any time, I would recommend keeping a copy of the article in your own userspace, by creating for example User:Faronw/Mountain Vista Governor's School which won't be deleted. You can work on the article there, adding content that you think will address the notability concerns expressed in the deletion discussion. The fact that other articles on Virginia Governor's Schools exist isn't really a good argument to keep this one, but rather is an argument to delete the others also.

At the moment, I don't think anything needs to be done about potential vandalism. I will keep and eye on the article, and if the vandalism returns, as an administrator here I can use tools to limit it - such as blocking users or IP addresses from editing, or protecting the article from anonymous editing. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:02, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I am currently updating the articles with facts that are in the State budget and local papers. That may help address the notability argument. Also the fact that the initial page was created as a joke by students before didnt help. This is my second article and hopefully that will help in this case also as I have been good about documenting sources and only using things that can be verified. I do appreciate you helping me with all this. I am still fairly new and I am learning. I do have a copy of the source on my desktop but I will also try the suggestion you gave me. I should also do that for DSR just in case. I am still lookin gfor a good GIF of our company logo and I will upload that ASAP (and as soon as i learn). Thanks again. I am trying the tilda thing to see if it works too. Faronw 13:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I just got another user who updated Mountain Vista (they wont be adding grades as quickly as they would like because of budget constraints). I did save the article as you suggested in my user space. I also added a disambiguation page for Mountain Vista (ironically with another High School). I was wondering should I do a Deletion Review of this article? It seems to just be flying under the radar so I don't want to raise its visibility unnecessarily but I would also want to avoid a Speedy deletion fight. It was notable enough to make the Washington Post so I would think that It should meet some threshold. There should be more news comming on it and articles so It may be best to continue to beef it up. Just not sure what to do at this point? Any Suggestions? Faronw 22:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there is any reason for a deletion review. You have expanded the article quite and bit and, I think, established its notability according to Wikipedia's guidelines. There won't be any kind of speedy deletion now. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Interesting question, when I created copies of the pages under my user space, they are showing up in the Catagories lists. Is there a way to keep that from happening? Faronw 17:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Very easy - just edit your copy of the article and remove the categories. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of "InWin"

Hi Edgar, I got the impression that you can undelete my InWin term easily. I would very much appreciate it. We use the technical term between colleagues and clients all the time and refer them to the Wikipedia page.

Thanks, ranbena

As far as I can tell, there has never been an article named InWin. Can you specify the name of the article you are referring to? Also, there are only limited circumstances in which an article can be undeleted. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, I found it. I have now undeleted Inwin. Since it was deleted by proposed deletion, it can be restored upon request. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Just as a courtesy, I have renominated this article through the AfD process: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inwin. Lankiveil 08:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC).

Regarding the deletion of "Ben Hilton"

Hi Edgar For some reason you seem to have deleted the reference wiki reference to ficional charector Ben Hilton, and left the reason: "article that does not assert significance". I uee wiki frequently, but am not experienced posting articles so i dont mind any hints/tips, but im dissapointed you deleted the page - I believe I stated the fictional nature and origin of this charector, and also the area (NW England) that he would be familiar to some, so I dont understand why the entry was deleted? I also had a talk page attached that you could have written feedback/comments on if you wanted to advise, rather than delete?

The reason that Ben Hilton was marked for speedy deletion twice and then deleted twice is that the article made no assertion of notability. Please see Wikipedia:Notability. If you can rewrite the article with reference to some type of national media attention (for example), the article may be kept. But if there isn't any significant media attention or other indicators of notability, then it doesn't meet guidelines for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Batrachotoxin

Hi Edgar, sorry about brutally changing the pic, I'm new here. One thing, the stereochem of the methyl near the ester at the top is reversed (R instead of S).

Devvochem

I believe you are correct. Thanks for catching another mistake. I have alerted the original uploader of that image, and replaced with another one. Hopefully it will be right this time. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Block of User:Wikimegamaster

Hi Edgar, I am the main target of this user, but I think this block can interfere with his capacity of discussing the deletion of his favorite article. Not sure what is the policy in this case... Thanks. Stellatomailing 22:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

If you were the only target of his nastiness, I'd probably just go ahead and unblock. But there was other vandalism and attacks, too. If he asks to be unblocked (which he can still do on his own talk page when he's blocked), I'll certainly listen. Otherwise, 24 hours isn't really all that long. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I just wanted to be sure he would get a fair chance to rever the deletion. Have a good one! Stellatomailing 22:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA :)

Thank you, Edgar181, for commenting on my RfA, which closed successfully with a tally of 76/0/1! I hope I will meet your expectations, and be sure I will continue trying to be a good editor as well as a good administrator :) If I may be of any assistance to you in the future (or if you see me commit some grievous error :), please drop me a line on my Talk page. Again, thank you, and happy editing! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, Ed. In case you're wondering, I haven't forgotten your offer from last year—took a while, but it appears your judgment was correct :) I hope to run into your contributions again, and keep up the good work. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

North American Young Generation in Nuclear

May I request the text of the North American Young Generation in Nuclear article as it was before it was deleted? Thanks! -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I put it here in your userspace. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I may be remaking the article, but I'll put my changes on my user space first. It's a very similar concept to the American Nuclear Society, though a little bit smaller, so I don't think notability will be a problem once I can get an objective stub written on it. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

anandamide image

I plan to revert your change of the AEA image but I wanted to clear it with you first. I know that the depiction of the arachidonic acid chain in that folded conformation is a little unusual for chemists but that is the way that it appears in EVERY SINGLE publication dealing with AEA (2-AG is usually depicted that way too). i am not sure why. it is probably historical or just biologists drawing chemicals... but IMHO it is strange to see it depicted as shown in your figure. if you object to the revert let me know.

Roadnottaken 14:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I certainly prefer the image that I switched to, not only because of the bond angles, but also because the drawing settings are more in line with Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry/Structure drawing. In any case, it doesn't matter too much to me and I won't object if you switch it back. Thanks for talking to me before reverting. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Liberty High School (Bealeton, Virginia)

There appears to be vandalism on this page. Can you please revert and watch for possible protection? Thanks. Faronw 18:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the vandalism. Feel free to do so yourself whenever you see it. If you need info about how to deal with vandalism, you can read Wikipedia:Vandalism. I'll keep an eye on the article too. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Talk Page protection

Can you now protect Talk:Movement to impeach George W. Bush too? those AOL IP's are back again to vandalize and go off topic on the subject. thank you Momusufan 20:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks like another admin just got to it. While I certainly don't approve of the way that the AOL editor is handling things, this seems more like a content dispute than vandalism. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Guttersnipe Clan

I do not understand the deletion of the Guttersnipe Clan page.

i) It has been defined elsewhere, namely Urban Dictionary. ii) It is refered to elsewhere in the wikipedia. iii) It discussed an important culture group and was a fragment intended for more knowledgeable users to add to. This is the second time it was deleted. After the first time, I sought reference information to conform to wiki|rules, but it gets deleted anyway.

Please correct.

Gastel

The article has been deleted twice because it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (see Wikipedia:Notability). Anybody can add anything to Urban Dictionary, so that is not at all an indication of significance. Specifically, the artcle met criteria A7 (WP:CSD#A7) for speedy deletion. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

As can anybody add a new website (even one that appears to have Notability) or as anyone can add to Wikipedia. That is the whole point of both of these sites - information is added and the users are able to justify, clarify or refute the truth set within. This is the new "truth" of the information superhighway - definitions of words and the subject of topics is in the hands of the users not the hands of the administration. By citing these rules twice, you have betrayed the essence of the Wikipedia site as well.

I ask again, re-instate this page as it is relevant and interesting. If you can not see this, then that is your failing, not mine.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gastel (talk • contribs)

Deletion of Agustus Gertrude Swarr Winfrey Clinton

I'm am extremely upset about your abhorrent behavior and your misguided deletion of my article about Agustus Gertrude Swarr Winfrey Clinton. Obviously I was not finished with it and I am still a novice at the technical goobldy gook. If you had any sense you would not have deleted this article because it informs the readers of a real women who clawed to become a prime minister after the death of her mother. Once you finish deleting other people's articles that they worked on and giving them the stupidest bureaucratic nonsense as an excuse please feel free to reply. With all due respect- Tyrantpat

First of all, you're more likely to get a helpful response if you refrain from silly accusations and insults. Secondly, there does not appear to have ever been an article titled Agustus Gertrude Swarr Winfrey Clinton. Can you tell me the exact name of the article that you are referring to? --Ed (Edgar181) 12:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ban Seven89 from site for violation of Wiki Pillar

User Seven89 does not follow the five pillars as he is a provocateur. In his edit of Red Hot Pawn he titles his edit "Clan bullshit removed." I find this offensive, as I am sure many others do too as they find the Clans very interesting and are a part of their lives, rather than 'Bullshit'. One of the five pillars is that people treat each other with respect. Arguing a point can be done cordially without use of profanity.

A quick scan of his contributions demonstrates nothing but immature malice.

I ask the Seven89 be banned from the site as there is clear evidence of his breaking of the Wiki | Rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gastel (talk • contribs)

I agree that the way Seven89 (talk · contribs) has edited that article is uncivil, and I have given him a warning. However, I agree with the edit he is trying to make. The statements about individual clans are essentially trivia, do not conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, and come across as self-promotion. Consequently, I have removed them. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Did you read any of his other edits? The user is obviously an anger monger. Keeping users like this on the site destroys the fabric that is trying to be created (much like the removal of the clans section all together).

I need (want) an archive

Seems one Edgar181 deleted the drug urban legends article. Is there an archive, because I could put forth a little bit of research.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Homsarrunner (talk • contribs)

Articles deleted under "proposed deletion" are automatically restored if the deletion is contested, so I undeleted drug urban legends. The article could certainly use some work - I hope you can turn it into a decent encyclopedia article. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I thought I'd give you this barnstar for your impressive edits I have been noticing in numerous articles. Great work! Wikidudeman (talk) 05:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ed (Edgar181) 11:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

In recognition ..

In recognition of your efforts, and specifically for reverting the vandalism to my user page, I hereby award you this starry thing:

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For reverting the vandalism to my user page. Philip Trueman 10:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Philip Trueman 10:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Ed (Edgar181) 11:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

5 O’Clock Charlie

Thanks^[1] -- just like the 4077th, I'm starting to get pretty used to this guy coming around every day! --A. B. ^(talk) 23:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hah. That's funny. I'm old enough to know what you are talking about without having to click on the links. Most people like your Charlie realize fairly quickly the futility of their actions, but some of the slower learners can be quite persistent. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a comment

Hi Edgar, I made a post for administrators against vandalism, you deleted this as a comment... not an original post... this user should be blocked (no instructions on proper format on the page, if I didn't do it right):

• User talk:Rooster30792 user warned repeatedly and made at least 2 edits after final warning.Balloonman 18:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think I removed any comment - at least not intentionally. I have now blocked Rooster30792 as a vandalism only account. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks... You erased my note when you blocked somebody else, leaving Rooster30792 untouched... but it's all good now. Thanks...Balloonman 18:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I see what happened. The bot removed your report because it misinterpreted it as a comment on the listing that I dealt with. The listing should look like {{vandal|Rooster30792}} and not [[User talk:Rooster30792]]. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info... I tried to use the brackets, and it didn't work and there were no instructions on the top of the page as to how to report a vandal... so I wasn't sure what the proper procedure/format was. So in order to get make the report I need to include <nowiki>{{vandal|Rooster30792}}</nowiki>?Balloonman 19:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm confusing you. You don't need to type in anything that includes "nowiki", that was just to get it to display the way you should type it. Specific instructions for how to add a request to WP:AIV show up when you edit that page. Hopefully this makes sense. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

User Jordan Brice

You applied his second block [2] so I thought it would be best to bring to your attention that two IP addresses have been editing in a similar way, and I suspect they may be the same person, if you could check out [3] and [4] that would be helpful. Thanks. Darrenhusted 13:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm...One of those IPs is located in the US, the other in the UK, but the editing looks the same. I'll put both on my watchlist and apply a block if they are actively vandalizing. I don't really know the background here, but if this user is a big problem you might try a request for checkuser (see WP:RFCU). --Ed (Edgar181) 13:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protection of NATO article

Thank you for dealing with this annoying bit of vandalism. However, it seems you re-inserted a bit of the vandalism by accident, which I reverted. Hopefully the article can get a bit of rest now ... :-). --Pekaje 15:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Yikes...I don't know how I ended up doing that. Thanks for catching and fixing it. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Filmaid International

Wondering why FilmAid International's entry was deleted? None of the information that was written up under it looked as though it was with the intent of self-promotion, it seemed to just be listing facts. And it certainly seems "notable"... they're partnered with at least 20 different international aid organizations and sponsored by at least twice as many, if their website is to be believed.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dosit (talk • contribs)

The article FilmAid International was nominated for deletion under the proposed deletion system by Shalom (talk · contribs) with the reasoning "Blatant conflict of interest. As international organizations go, this one's not notable." The "blatant conflict of interest" comment probably stems from the fact that the article was created by Filmaid (talk · contribs), and the article did not make much of an assertion of notability. I agreed and deleted it. But articles deleted this way are restored upon request, so I have undeleted it. If you have other info that indicates notability please go ahead and add it to the article, and that may prevent it from getting deleted again. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Response to overturned PROD

Thanks for letting me know, though usually I don't care. Having checked the newly added references, I am satisfied that COI is not significant enough to warrant a COI tag, much less deletion. Shalom ^Hello 02:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hapticity

Hi, just dropping you a note to say I've replied here. --Rifleman 82 15:01, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Redirect

No problem :) I followed the link from CAT:CSD. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Numpty

You speedy deleted this moments before I hit save on my own solution. Given how often this has been recreated, and the old AFD result, I went ahead with my solution. But given you had just deleted it, I wanted to give you a chance to review my actions so that noone thinks we are wheel-warring over this. My actions are to salt the page, but as a soft redirect to the Wiktionary article. IMHO this fulfills the intent of the old AFD, and will prevent the repeated chain of recreations. If you have any issues with this solution, please let me know. - TexasAndroid 15:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me. You created the ideal solution. I was thinking along the same lines, checking Wiktionary to see if it was there when you made the change. Cheers. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Pan amalgamation

Thanks for your additions and corrections to the article Pan amagamation. I just noticed, however, that due to my own stupid spelling error, there are two articles: Pan amagamation (mispelled) and Pan amalgamation (spelled correctly and somewhat more detailed). I suppose that I should not edit wiki stuff when I am tired. I would delete the mispelled version, but I am not sure how. I apologize for the confusion.Plazak 18:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I didn't even recognize the misspelling myself. All you have to do is copy the content you're interested in from one article and add it the correct article. Then redirect the misspelled one (see Wikipedia:Redirect). Alternately, to delete an article in which you are the sole editor add {{db-author}} (see Wikipedia:Speedy deletion) to it and an administrator will delete it. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Sweet Noise

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sweet Noise. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 64.178.96.168 20:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

This was left on my talk page. Dunno why - it was your deletion. cheers Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

biased editors

Hi Ed, you welcomed me to WP a few months ago. I have a question concerning how to respond to editors who are clearly biased. A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism is a page I am involved editing. One very active editor, Filll, clearly showed his bias in his 00:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC) adition to the talk page. With this, he disqualified himself as an editor in my opinion. His ideas about Intelligent Design and his perceived ulterior motives of it's proponents clearly has an influence on his edits (not allowing to mention academic credentials of signers because it would turn the article into a religious tract, etc). Is there a forum to bring such an issue up? Is it possible to restrict editing privileges for certain articles only? If so, who could issue such restrictions? What is even more disappointing is that nobody of the other editors took a stand on this. Quite the opposite, Hrafn42 called the Discovery Institute liars. There is clearly a negative bias from a few editors. Northfox 04:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for getting back to you so late - I've been away for awhile. Having biases does not disqualify anyone from editing articles. We all have biases, so the key to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policies is to try to prevent those biases from coloring Wikipedia's articles. That's not always an easy task, and it certainly leads to conflict at times. If you would like a third party to review the situation Requests for Comment may be a good place to start. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

thanks for coming back to me and explaining the next step. The issue is not that serious that it would require a RfC. Northfox 13:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I was going to revert that last comment as I had already replied to it on the vandal's userpage. Thanks again HappiestCamper 20:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm thanking you once again for blocking that incredibly disruptive vandal. HappiestCamper 20:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. And thank you to you also for the vandal fighting. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I do what I can to help stop this mass vandalism. HappiestCamper 21:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Medicinal Chem

Dear Sir I just edit a 1st draft for carbophil, a speciality today in Chile, but I do not know when there is a box for drugs like the german version. Maybe Calcium-carbophil be a minor medicine --Penarc 18:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, what you are looking for is Template:Drugbox. Please let me know if that's not it, and I'll try to find what you need. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Pennsylvania

Hello there!

I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:

• Contact us on IRC at #wikimedia-pa
• Join our mailing list
• Visit our blog at http://wmfpa.blogspot.com

Thanks and I hope you join up! Cbrown1023 talk 03:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hey, thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page! Much appreciated! --omtay38 19:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for blocking User:202.62.80.98. Angel Of Sadness ^T/C 20:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Many thanks for reverting the abuse on my talk page, and the block on User:71.252.66.134. Regards, --Stephen Burnett 17:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Loren's RP Server

Just a quick question, why did you "speedy delete" that page? It's a page for a developing SA:MP roleplay, and having it can help it grow faster. I see no reason why it doesn't have enough significance to be here. Besides, what else can you think of with a similar name that would be more significant? I can't think of anything
Not to sound like an angry kid or something, but why would you do that?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Loren'sRP (talk • contribs)

I deleted Loren's RP Server because it met one of the criteria for speedy deletion (specifically, this one). If the subject of the article that was deleted does in fact meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for inclusion (see WP:N) you can rewrite the article with mention of national media attention, or whatever. You might also want to read WP:COI. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I suppose that's true, it is unremarkable so far. But still, who is hurt by having it on here?

Of course no one is hurt, but that's not the standard for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

72.0.72.121

I've unblocked 72.0.72.121 (talk · contribs) because the IP didn't do anything wrong- the warning they received was erroneous and it was two weeks old, and they've really been forced into an argument.-Wafulz 12:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I don't see it quite the same way, but I don't object to the unblock. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Bill Mezzacapo

Hi yesterday I tagged the article Bill Mezzacapo for speedy deletion since you have deleted it the user that created it has contacted me and thinks that it shouldn't have been deleted. Even though I still believe that it should be deleted I wish to avoid a long drawn out discussion between myself and the group of scouts that created the article and I was wondering whether you could restore the article and then put it through the normal afd process. Doing this I feel would give them a chance to defend their article and if the discussion turns out for delete would let them know that I am not the only one who feels that this article should be deleted, and it might stop a dispute before it gets started. ChrisLamb 15:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate what you are doing for this new user, but the article clearly met the criteria for speedy deletion and AFD is unnecessary. The article creator's response to you was inappropriate (and really should have been directed at me anyway). If they persist, I would recommend pointing them to Wikipedia:Deletion review or to my talk page. Thanks for you efforts. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

*drum roll*

		The Chemistry Star
		For your excellent (and speedy :) work on Category:Drug pages needing a structure drawing. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! A couple more, and then I'll be done with the ones I'm able to do (non-polypeptides, etc.) --Ed (Edgar181) 17:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Replied at the article Talk. My, that was embarrassing... :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Chem-awb

Okay, done with your suggestions. The completed tasks can be seen here. Anything else needs to be done? --Rifleman 82 01:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again! I can't think of anything else at the moment. But I'll let you know if something comes up. --Ed (Edgar181) 09:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

remove mention of attack page

Mind if I remove the mention of the attack page created by the recently blocked vandal Delphonerism on his talk page for the obvious reason? --Tao of tyler 11:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I've done it myself. I should have done it when I first blocked him. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:41, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: edits to- Growth hormone releasing hexapeptide

I am new to this and am not sure of proper protocols, but noticed factual errors confusing GHRP and GHRH and tried to fix them. While your structural diagram is great, it seems you misunderstood one of my changes and edited it back in a way that returned to the confusion (you removed a "not"). Fact: GHRP was not derived from GHRH, shares no sequence relation and acts by a different mechanism. I have tried to again correct the text and have commented here to you to make it clear. (I wrote the section on this topic for a major medical textbook, so I do have plenty of references but not the time to learn how to add them to Wikipedia, I just couldn't stand to leave the errors).

I'm sorry if my edits to the article introduced an inaccuracy. Thanks for your help in correcting it. I was trying to rephrase the introduction so that the article states what GHRP-6 is, rather than what it isn't. If you could add such a description, and if you could add a reference to the article, that would be greatly appreciated. Or if you'd prefer, you can just give me the references here on my talk page, or email them to me (see the "E-mail this user" link on the left) - then I can add them to the article. Thanks again. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I reworded the entry and would suggest this ref- Korbonits, M., Goldstone, A.P., Gueorguiev, M., and Grossman, A.B. 2004. Ghrelin--a hormone with multiple functions. Front Neuroendocrinol 25:27-68.

I like how you rewrote it - it makes sense to me now. Thanks. I've added the reference. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Glad to help.

Deserved

		The Chain Barnstar of Recognition
		For making a difference! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3-5 others with 500+ edits but no barnstar. So that everyone who deserves one will get one Pseudoanonymous 20:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

If you have much more than 500+ please don't be offended; I am thinking about

• The Chain Barnstar of Merit: 1500+
• The Chain Barnstar of Diligence: 2500+
• The Wikipedian's Chain Barnstar of Honour: 5000+

or even just for you

• The Wikipedian's Chain Barnstar of Eliteness: 10 000+

But I have to make them first Pseudoanonymous 20:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! That's very kind of you. (However, I'm not sure that anyone, myself included, deserves recognition just for number of edits, so I probably won't do the chain-letter thing.) --Ed (Edgar181) 20:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Molecular Formula Disambiguation Pages

Hi Ed, I happened to see your create of the C4H8O3 page and found there were a few(?) more of them around. They look useful. Are they organized anywhere? Do you link back to them in the Chem Infoboxes? ChemGardener 01:33, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I recently created a few dozen disambig pages for molecular formulas - mostly for organic compounds up to five carbons. They have not been organized anywhere, and they aren't linked to from chemboxes or anywhere else. My reason for creating them is so that they will show up in Google or other search engine results. I created them using the page User:Edgar181/sandbox2 (and earlier versions in the history) which is modified from existing pages such as Dictionary_of_chemical_formulas/Merge/C2. --Ed (Edgar181) 02:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi there, reported someone for vandalism after he has repeatedly vandalised my talk page contributions on the Alcoholics Anonymous article. You removed my report, stating that it wasn't vandalism. The Wikipedia:Vandalism official policy states the following:

"Discussion page vandalism Blanking the posts of other users from talk pages other than your own, Wikipedia space, and other discussions, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc., is generally considered vandalism. An obvious exception is moving posts to a proper place (e.g. protection requests to WP:RFPP). Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there. The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page, where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion."

I wonder if I am misunderstanding what has been said in this section, but I don't think it minces its words. I am sure you can understand my frustration. I would be grateful if you could expand upon your reasoning. 82.19.66.37 22:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, there is nothing intentionally destructive about what the other user is doing. I'm not saying what he is doing is right, just that it is not "vandalism." This is more of a dispute about the purpose of a talk page. I would recommend some form of dispute resolution such as Wikipedia:Requests for comment or Wikipedia:Third opinion. I can understand the frustration - everyone who has been around Wikipedia long enough has been through the same thing. At this point, I just don't think blocking either one of the disputing parties is a good idea. I hope this helps. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:39, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Carbon Label

Edgar, I see that you removed the definitions for carbon labels that cover labeling of carbon emissions of products/services. Can you suggest an alternative definition title? Carbon Labeling? Carbon Emission Label? I think this is an important definition, as carbon labels are an up-and-coming hot item, and need a definition. Don't want to stomp on your valid chemical definition though.

D'oh! When I removed that information, I was intending to put it in a new article, rather than just deleting it. But I got distracted and completely forgot. My apologies. I have now created carbon emission label with that content. Please feel free to move/rename it as you see fit. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Fantastic - many thanks.

Pentachlorophenol

Hi Edgar. The infobox and the categories that were in the article after your edit felt out somehow. Can you fix that? Thanks. -- 77.56.104.161 23:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, I added back in some of the deleted content. But I'm worried that the unsourced chunk of text added in earlier has been cut and pasted from somewhere and might be a copyright violation. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

why did you delete the wyattean theories?

it wasnt about people or a group or anything it was about a group of theories this guy i know made. just wondering.

The page did not make any assertion of notability and therefore met criteria for speedy deletion. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

but he is notable.... how would you know if his theorys were notable or not if youve never met him?

Peter Priesthood

I just got an automated warning saying that Peter Priesthood was deleted or was being deleted because it was an "attack" page. Not sure why I got the message - perhaps I edited it long ago. I can't see its contents to know. The fact that I must have edited it ages ago leads me to believe that it was probably in fact a legitimate page, not someone's drive-by vandalism.

I live in Utah. Unless the page is obvious vandalism, this phrase does belong in Wikipedia. It is a very popular term used among Mormon teenagers to describe a pious Mormon male - the kind that won't go near a girl till his 16th birthday or go swimming on Sunday because he's too caught up in trying to take every word the church says literally. The female analog is "Molly Mormon".

These terms, while pejorative regarding the people they describe, are not considered offensive, and are freely spoken inside Mormon churches. Even the LDS youth magazine is known to refer to it (i.e. "I have always wanted to do what's right, but it's hard to find the line between pleasing God and being labeled a Peter Priesthood/Molly Mormon".)

If that's what the Peter Priesthood article used to describe, then it should be reinstated.

Reswobslc 19:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the article history, it looks like you created the article simply as a redirect to Molly Mormon, which no longer exists. Someone else came along and wrote the article that another person marked as an attack page, and then I deleted it. I'm not sure why you got the automated warning. Feel free to just deleted the warning. Looking back at the article as it stood, considering it an "attack" article may a bit of a stretch - I guess I thought it was referring to a real person, not a stereotype. If you want to recreate an article at "Peter Priesthood", and you think the term is notable, I certainly won't object. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Did Molly Mormon contain anything substantial? Its deletion log says it was prodded, which I probably would have objected to had I known (unless, of course the article only contains garbage, which it very well might have). If it does contain something keepable, perhaps let's reinstate them both, and if not, then nothing to worry about - someone will eventually probably come along and write something good for both of those articles. Reswobslc 20:30, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Prodded articles are generally undeleted if there is an objection, so I have restored Molly Mormon. I can give you a copy of the Peter Priesthood article too, if you want it. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Wasn't Peter Priesthood just a redirect to Molly Mormon? If the contents are anything like I found in the Google cache (mentioning "gullible" and "pants up high"), that's garbage and the redirect I added may as well stay. Reswobslc 22:04, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Naumi Hotel

I was told that my page that i was wanting to create for Naumi Hotel was deleted with this message: The page did not make any assertion of notability and therefore met criteria for speedy deletion. --Ed

i have all the facts and information from www.naumihotel.com as it is one of the first boutique hotels in singapore! its a fact, and if you google it you can find more sources! Please advise.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.189.43.94 (talk • contribs)

Someone else marked Naumi hotel for speedy deletion, I agreed and deleted it because it met the criteria listed in WP:CSD. The article made no assertion of the notability of the hotel. Every article should include information from independent sources, such as a newspaper article for example, that indicates the significance of the subject. Something like a Google search turning up results is not really an indication of notability. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Editing

I wholeheartedly disagree with you, Ed. Not only is the information I added correct regarding the manufacturing of toothpaste in China, it is also mentioned in the article. Please don't leave me any further negative (incorrect) messages unless they are constructive.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Duerring (talk • contribs)

Yes, it is already mentioned in the article - that was my point. Putting another reference to it after the phrase "Like ethylene glycol..." was out of place because in this sense its use is not like ethylene glycol. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:16, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

User: 202.37.173.10

Hi. I'm contacting you because you User:202.37.173.10 back in May for vandalism, which wasn't his first block. He is still continuing his activity, as seen with this edit on the Live Free or Die Hard article. Just thought I'd let you know. Thanks. Nightscream 01:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, but I've been travelling and without internet access for awhile. It looks like the vandalism has stopped - if it occurs again, just let me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 08:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Your expertise needed

Hi, could you add an image for Magnesium trisilicate? Badagnani 21:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've added it. Sorry for the late reply, but I've been travelling and without internet access for awhile. --Ed (Edgar181) 08:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Whitmorewolveyr

This user needs some help. A while ago you blocked a user for a username violation, however Whitmorewolvey added a banned template onto their userpage, showing that he does not understand the difference between a block and a ban, I am telling him to read WP:BAN but he isn't listening, so can you keep an eye on him? The sunder king 11:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Just been blocked for disruption. The sunder king 11:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems to be a communication problem. Thanks for letting me know. I will continue to watch when the block expires. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleted my site

I am curious why you deleted F.A.F. (Fans Against Floyd) when I had typed hang on and was in the process of editing and arguing my point about my article? Sitdown248 18:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

That's really not what Wikipedia is for. The article clearly met the criteria for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Notability for further details. If I had known that you were still making further argument in favor of the article, I wouldn't have deleted it at that time, and I'm sorry about that. Nevertheless, if you disagree with the deletion, you are free to raise the issue at Wikipedia:Deletion review. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

There Seems To Be Some Kind Of Edit War

Over at Vicious and Delicious. I'm not involved in it and am not planning to, but I felt someone should be made aware of it. -WarthogDemon 18:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've protected the article. Hopefully the two editors will begin to use the talk page to discuss changes tot he article, and then I'll unprotect it. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

well thanks

I'm glad I don't "assert significance." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepwnerer7157 (talk • contribs) 03:04, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

Lists being used as clearinghouses for requested items

You referred me to [5], but I think the question belongs on talk:list_of_organic_compounds. In jeneral, I think projects have so much trouble arriving at the rules and defintions and purposes that it is better to simply ignore any rules, however conventional, and ignore them to follow simple rules until you get TWO objections. That's when I know that I need a collaborator or purposes other than the mechanical, because I'm opposing homeostatic mechanisms. Brewhaha@edmc.net 15:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you that there is no clear purpose for the list. However, WP:CHEMS is an ideal place for you to bring it up because that's about the only place you'll find folks interested in commenting on your merge proposal. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:46, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Virtual Simulators

Are virtual simulators such as this appropriate external links? -WarthogDemon 18:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, it doesn't add any useful information to the article. I would be inclined to removed that link and others like it. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Consider it done, thanks. -WarthogDemon 19:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

User talk:66.91.136.130

Ed, IP 66.91.136.130 has vandalized 3 more articles: Apollo program, Apollo 16, and Apollo 15. You warned him earlier this year. Please block him. Thank you. LanceBarber 08:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Done.--Ed (Edgar181) 09:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. LanceBarber 00:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Just a question.

But isn't any of the horrible language in this persons userpage against Wikipedia rules? Here is the link to the page. User:Your faces name Check out his usertalk page too,That seems offensive to me. Dan the man1983 18:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the pages and blocked the user. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:05, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Cool, no worries. Dan the man1983 19:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week

WikiProject Pharmacology is currently organizing a new Collaboration of the Week program, designed to bring drug and medication related articles up to featured status. We're currently soliciting nominations and/or voting on nominations for the first WP:RxCOTW, to begin on September 5, 2007. Please stop by the Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week page to participate! Thanks! Dr. Cash 17:48, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow

Lighting fast with the blockhammer :) I clicked and it was already there! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice work on Finasteride as well, BTW. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I just happened to be looking at my watchlist at the time. Do you think Finasteride and Merck need to be protected? It's a low level of vandalism from that one person that's easy to rollback, but he does seem to be persistent. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I've been considering it. On finasteride, for one, there have been no productive IP edits recently; it was protected for a while in late July/early August, and the vandalism returned immediately after expiry; I think it might be warranted. Merck has had some constructive edits, so I'd think twice before protecting it. I don't think such blatant vandalism could be considered a content dispute; do you? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Protecting finasteride, but not Merck seems perfectly reasonable to me. It's certainly not a content dispute - it's pure vandalism. I see that you've already gone ahead and done the protection. Thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought you'd be around to reply soon enough :) Thank you for keeping things under control, and for your mighty work over at Category:Drug pages needing a structure drawing (I noticed :). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that you did quite a bit of them too.  :) --Ed (Edgar181) 23:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Dahl (talk · contribs) has been quite active over there as well. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

That's because it takes three of us to keep up with Arcadian. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Heh, true. I see you've added that hoodia link to the Blacklist; I can never find the local list. I should probably add a link to it at my user page. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Merger

Edgar, I went ahead and merged Deoxynivalenol with DON Vomitoxin. I created the DON article and have no problems with the content found in the former. Since it's exactly the same toxin it maade sense to go ahead and merge. I added more internal links as well. Thanks for the merger suggestion. Noles1984 14:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Great! Just one question though: is "DON Vomitoxin" really a name for it? It seems more like "DON" and "vomitoxin" are essentially synonyms, and putting them together into the title is a bit awkward. None of the references use "DON vomitoxin" like that. Shouldn't it be titled "deoxynivalenol" or "vomitoxin" or "DON", but not a combination of those terms? --Ed (Edgar181) 18:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit War at List of Characters in Bully article.

This month alone there has been 16 edits in the last 3 days. Check it out at List of characters in Bully Dan the man1983 22:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry but that article is about as far from my area of knowledge as is possible. I have no idea which edit might be good and which might be bad. I'd recommend that you ask for help from another (perhaps...younger) admin.  :) --Ed (Edgar181) 23:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok cool Dan the man1983 04:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week

Aspirin has been selected as this week's Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week! Please help us bring this article up to featured standards during the week. The goal is to nominate this at WP:FAC on September 10, 2007.

Also, please visitWP:RxCOTW to support other articles for the next COTW. Articles that have been nominated thus far include Doxorubicin, Paracetamol (in the lead with 4 support votes so far), Muscle relaxant, Ethanol, and Bufotenin.

In other news:

• Bupropion has been promoted to featured status on August 31, 2007.

• The Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology main page has been updated and overhauled, to make it easier to find things, as well as to highlight other goals and announcements for the project.

• Garrondo is asking for individuals to help review Therapies for multiple sclerosis, as he is considering nominating this article for GA status.

• Fvasconcellos notes that discussion is ongoing regarding the current wording of MEDMOS on including dosage information in drug articles. All input is welcome.

Dr. Cash 00:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Diagram

Hi, could you possibly add diagrams to Disodium guanylate and Disodium inosinate? Badagnani 01:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I've added infoxes with images to each. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Damn, you're good. How do you do it?

Here is one more: Oleuropein. This one might be hard! Badagnani 16:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, done. In my career I've had quite a bit of experience drawing chemical structures, so it's second nature by now. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For catching this. I can't believe I didn't :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I found a couple of mine that were miscategorized, too (like this. Piperazines and piperdines are easy to mix up. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:22, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

70.68.179.142

He is a suspected sock puppet, so you may want to look into that. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

What does this mean for Charles669? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Not having familiarity with this situation (I just came across today his inappropriate tagging of articles for speedy deletion, and blocked him for that), I'm not sure. Right now Charles669 is not editing and the IP is blocked, so I'm just going to let it go for now, but keep an eye on the two. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. Charles669 is blocked too. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the heads up re the TiVo Forum article. I will re-list it per your suggestion later this afternoon. Lumbergh 15:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Ed, I think I might have screwed up adding the TiVo Forum to the log of articles for deletion for today. It doesn't look right. Did I do something incorrectly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan Parnell (talk • contribs) 17:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

It looks fine to me. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted my page

Hi Edgar, I was wondering why my page keeps being deleted stating that my page is blatent advertising. I am a music artist, this article simply gives a brief note about the origins of The Earlybirds band like any other band page does, im not trying to advertise it I do not see how what i have done has differed from any other bands page for example The Checks another band from New Zealand if you view their page there is no difference in the angle they are taking to show the band on wikipedia. My band is important enough to be viewed on wikipedia, as we have recently been signed to a major record label, however it is not the company that is running this page it is myself one of the musicians in the band. Thankyou.

The Earlybirds (band) 21:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:User:The_Earlybirds_%28band%29"

I deleted the article about your band at User:The Earlybirds (which incidently was improperly located as a user page, rather than as an article) because it met the criteria for deletion at listed at WP:CSD#A7. Please see WP:BAND for the level of notability generally accepted as being necessary for inclusion in Wikipedia. I also deleted User:The Earlybirds (band) as an inappropriate redirect to that article. Finally, I deleted User talk:The Earlybirds because it was the talk page for a user that does not exist. I did not mention blatant advertising in any reasoning for these deletions. I hope this helps explain things. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, my apologies it was a different person who stated it was blatent advertising, but I have a question, how do you create a page that is located as an article rather then a user page? Do i also have to create a new account to do this. Thanks The Earlybirds (band) —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Earlybirds (band) (talk • contribs) 23:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

You might check out Help:Contents and Help:Starting a new page. You just need to make sure that articles do not start with"User:" or "User talk:" --Ed (Edgar181) 00:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Melt the clouds of sin and sadness, drive the dark of doubt away!

Marlith ^T/C has wished you well! Joy promotes WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the WikiJoy by sharing the joy someone else, Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Marlith ^T/C 00:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. 15:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Flurithromycin

Hi Ed. I stumbled across Flurithromycin and noticed your structure (Image:Flurithromycin.png) appears to be missing a carbonyl at the 10-position—see CID 71260 from PubChem. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, good eyes. I'll fix it shortly. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, it's fixed now. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; that was quick. I was just comparing it to the structure of erythromycin and something looked off. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Block of User:194.81.161.150

Your block of User:194.81.161.150 blocked our whole college you know? It's a tricky call when one user spoils it for all the others, and perhaps you considered this, but in case you didn't know I hope you don't mind me mentioning it.

Ewen 18:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't mind if you mention it. I have no way of knowing if an IP address registered to a college is used by one individual or by thousands. To lessen "collateral damage", for educational IP addresses I always block anonymous users only - registered users at your college are still able to edit. Wikipedia needs to control vandalism, so if your school cannot control the editing of its students, we have no choice but to do it ourselves. Unfortunately, that means that one misbehaving student can ruin anonymous editing for many. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Speedy Delete DOGSOC article

Hi,

This is to inform you that I differ with your decision to speed delete (A7) the wikipage on "dogsoc" or "Dismantling our Government Selling our Cities" which I have started. You are possibly unaware that DOGSOC is a technical term/phrase which is used among certain specialised and qualified RA professionals in Asia who "take on" governments on various issues. The etymology of this phrase shall be explained on the article in due course. There is also an eponymous Yahoo group which was started by me a few days back concerning this phrase - the members of which shall take a keen interest in this wiki article - as we do for many wiki pages. I have already received 2 protests from RAs who are unable to contribute to this page. I reiterate that the wiki page is about DOGSOC and not the group.

Open Source / FLOSS only works when knowledgeable and honest people play by the rules. I have done the mandatory wiki searches, such as for "dismantling"+"selling"+"cities" with no relevant results before starting this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dogsoc (talk • contribs) 05:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The article that I deleted was nothing more than a link to a Yahoo group. It clearly met Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion. There are other better places than Wikipedia for you to try to create links to your group. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I beg to differ, it was clearly mentioned that it was a starting post. It was a work in progress to which a not insubstantial quantity of information was waiting to be collaboratively transferred in a flash when it was regrettably "speedily" deleted. The link was posted on the page as a confirmation marker that it was the correct page to "dump" the preformatted encyclopedi(a)c material to. I may mention that wiki editors ought to encourage and assist usage /documentation of the indigenous phrases - of Third World citizens who may not be as computer literate, English speaking or well educated as their First world counterparts :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dogsoc (talk • contribs) 11:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Oops!

You're right, dear Edgar - let me fix that right away! :) Love, Phaedriel - 11:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

help

...Make You Breathe is back, and the band to which it refers is at AFD. Help is appreciated. - CobaltBlueTony 18:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I've just gone ahead and added this to the current AFD. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Keck clips

Thanks for the picture! --Rifleman 82 02:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Update

Here's a brief update in some of the recent developments of WikiProject Pharmacology!

• Aspirin has just completed its two week run as the first Collaboration of the Week! Many thanks to those editors that contributed; the article got a lot of good work accomplished, and in particular, much work was done in fixing up the history section. It's still not quite "done" yet (is a wikipedia article really ever done?), but after two weeks I think it's more important to push onwards with the development of the new collaboration of the week program. I will be fixing up Aspirin in the next few days and possibly nominating it for either GA or FA status.

• Muscle relaxant has been selected as the new Collaboration of the week until October 2, 2007! This article is currently rated as a "stub", so it's got quite a bit of work cut out for collaborators! Admittedly, featured status could be a long way off,... but still attainable! At the least, maybe we could at least get it up to meeting the Good article criteria? Please stop by the article and help improve it.

• Resveratrol, having recently achieved GA status on August 16, 2007, is now making a run for featured status. This is quite a fascinating compound. If you can, please stop by its discussion page and leave comments in support of it.

• Please remember that Wikipedia is not a forum for discussing or dispensing medical advice amongst users. Specifically, talk pages of articles should only be used to discuss improving the actual article in question. To help alleviate this situation, the template {{talkheader}} may be added to the top of talk pages, reminding users of the purpose of such pages. Additionally, unsigned comments and comments by anonymous users that are inappropriate may be removed from talk pages without being considered vandalism.

• There was an interesting article on ZDNet last week about Hewlett Packard licensing its patented microneedle technology used in common inkjet printers to be used in transdermal patches to deliver a time-controlled release of drugs to patients. This information could be added to articles such as route of administration or drug delivery.

You are receiving this message because you are listed as one of the participants of WikiProject Pharmacology.

Dr. Cash 05:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Abuse reports/206.183.139.120

I noticed you blocked this user for 6 months due to vandalism and was wondering if you had reported the user to their ISP. If you haven't, I have filed Wikipedia:Abuse reports/206.183.139.120. If you have, then I can simply delete that. Anyway, thanks.-Andrew c ^[talk] 14:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I didn't file any kind of abuse report. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Disagreement over Pourbaix diagrams in element articles

Greetings. Need to get another opinion on this. User:Cadmium is in the process of adding large graphics of Pourbaix diagrams to element pages -- please see what he as added to lead. Also please see my comments on it on talk:lead. He claims (on my talk page) that these diagrams are standard fare, although I have looked in two standard Pchem texts and an advanced inorganic chem text, and I can find no reference to them. To me, the diagrams are esoteric and that most readers will not understand them, and that they certainly don't belong as full size inline insertions. I am not going to revert these mods to lead a second time. Please let me know what you think should be done about this. Thanks. Karl Hahn (T) (C) 19:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I've replied at Talk:Lead. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: 206.130.179.100

Thanks! -- ALLSTAR ECHO 13:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

re: 217.116.248.35

Hi, hope you don't mind me messaging, regarding the user 217.116.248.35 on Fatal Frame, they have returned just after my report on the vandal page was removed after the warning was issued, and have again reverted/re-added the link overturning your own edit. It could be worth noting that I suspect user 217.116.248.35 is also User:Yamiza who started a discussion on the article talk page about the link just before the edit warring began. Parjay ► Talk 17:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have now blocked that IP address for 24 hours. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello

I just want to thank you for your worl toward vandalism, thants all, cheers!! Nick10000 19:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Stop

Please stop wasting my time. If you must communicate with me, ask me for permission first via YOUR talk page. Do NOT post on my talk page without my permission again. Also, please stop posting red links on my page, they're making me feel very ill. I think it's you who needs to use the sandbox and learn how to post links that ACTUALLY EXIST. I don't wish to here from you again. If it's essential that you speak to me, as already stated, you will do it on this page. I will not however put this page on my watchlist, and even if I find your poorly constructed reply, it's less than likely that I will spend any more than 5 seconds looking at it. Kindest regards Tompeacock 10:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

You might take some time to take a look at some of Wikipedia's core policies. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's policies, you'll will be blocked from editing. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Eagles

Thanks for the revert. Also for the advice on the 3 revert rule. What you said is sensible but I do know (and have argued with) 1 Admin who feels that you can't use the 3 revert rule on vandalism! Kelpin 13:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I guess because the policy says "simple and obvious vandalism" is exempt, there could be some grey area. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Checkme please

I reverted some vandalsim to the Liberty High School and placed a warning on the ip address talk page. Just do a quick check on both to make sure I did it correctly (followed policies). I tried but its good to get a second set of experienced eyes to check things out. Faronw 18:04, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

It looks fine to me. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Block of 141.150.54.2

Hello. I see that you blocked User:141.150.54.2 for one year while blocking account creation. However, it is a shared IP address and did not even receive a "please stop" warning and a final warning. So when someone reports an IP to WP:AIV, especially a shared IP, check whether the IP vandalized after final warning, and be careful from now on. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 19:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

No. Please do not make the bad faith assumption that I wasn't careful. For a shared IP with a block log that long, with that much vandalism arising from it, an immediate block is entirely appropriate. I have done so for as long as I've been an admin and I will continue to do so. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know that that IP belongs to my school, which has about 1,500 people, so I will let my school principal or a network administrator know that the students continue to vandalize. And by the way, could you please be more nicer when replying and explaining why shared IP long-term block is appropriate? "No. Please do not make..." did not seem nice to me, just to let you know. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 00:07, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Your original comment comes across to me as accusatory and condescending. My reply to you was firm, but polite - including a nice "please". If it came across otherwise, it certainly wasn't intended. And thank you for making the effort to address vandalism from that end. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being nicer, and you're welcome. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 01:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Topicity

Hi Ed. Could you please move the images used in topicity to the Commons as they are requested to be used in the German article. Thanks. --Leyo 16:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, done. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the incredibly fast action. --Leyo 18:10, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. You caught me at the only time that I was online yesterday. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)