Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TimVickers (talk | contribs) at 19:49, 10 October 2007 (→AfD nomination of Human chemistry: edit). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Corpuscularianism

As User:Avihu said on the talk page, there's something wrong with Corpuscularianism. Geber is neither Italian nor Franciscan nor 13th-century. Perhaps it's a different Geber, but it doesn't sound like an Italian name. --Itub 10:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:Corpuscularianism. --Sadi Carnot 15:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Administrator categories

Perhaps categories can be created and administrators can voluntarily put their name in such category? Polounit 00:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Good suggestion, but I think one or two adminstrators should get the ball rolling on this. --Sadi Carnot 00:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

If you need the help of an admin with a knowledge of science at any point, I my be able to assist. Specifically, I'm an astronomer/astrophysicist/physicist. Mike Peel 07:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Mike Peel, thanks for the tip. I added you to my: Science admin list. Ideally, I'd like to see admins grouped per the categories each person likes to do edit in. Thus, if I was in need of assistance on a knitting article (very unlikely) I could find an admin excited to help out. Thanks again: --Sadi Carnot 16:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Georgi-Gladyshev.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Georgi-Gladyshev.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Georgi-P-Gladyshev.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Georgi-P-Gladyshev.jpg. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 13:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:HotorNot-screen-pic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HotorNot-screen-pic.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Elective Affinities

You have left the article titled Elective Affinities in a condition in which it can only be considered disrespectful to the reader. Before you edited it, it stated at the beginning that Elective Affinities is a novel by Goethe. NOW the first paragraph makes it appear to be about a concept in chemistry. If it's about a concept in chemistry, then a novel inspired by that concept might appropriately be mentioned in a terse link to another article, maybe in a "popular culture" section. If it's NOT about a concept in chemistry, but about a novel and/or a sociological theory inspired by a concept in chemistry, then it needs to say so at the beginning; to deceive the reader in the first paragraph is abusive. Michael Hardy 21:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I've commented on you further at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Chemistry. Michael Hardy 22:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

M.H., possibly you are misinterpreting things. Goethe’s Elective Affinities is three different articles in one and all contained in his 1809 book. The modern chemical theory is called chemical affinity. In the 18th and into the 19th century, however, it was called Elective Affinities the quintessential book being Torbern Bergman’s 1775 textbook A Dissertation on Elective Affinities. Elective affinities, according to Lavoisier in his 1787 Elements of Chemistry, "holds the fame place with regard to the other branches of chemistry." Goethe, in turn, based his novel on Bergman’s book, and the entire novella is sewn together with the chemical theory affinities, “the force of reaction”. There have been several books written on this, e.g. “Goethe’s use of chemical theory in his Elective Affinities” (ch. 18 by Jeremy Adler) from the 1990 book Romanticism and the Sciences, which goes through all the chemists and chemical affinity reactions Goethe used in the novel.

On the opening page of Astrida Tantillo’s 2001 book Goethe’s Elective Affinities and the Critics, for instance, it states:

“From the time of its publication to today, Goethe’s novel, Die Wahlverwandtschaften (Elective Affinities, 1809), has been aroused a storm of interpretive confusion. Readers fiercely debate the role of the chemical theory of elective affinities presented in the novel. Some argue that it suggest a philosophy of nature that is rooted in fate. Others maintain that it is about free choice. Others believe that the chemical the chemical theory is merely a structural device that allows the author to foreshadow events in the novel and bears no relevance to the greater issues of the novel.”

Also, try reading science historian Mi Gyung Kim’s 600-page, 2003 chemistry history book Affinity, That Elusive Dream – A Genealogy of the Chemical Revolution, which quotes Goethe on the opening page, to get a better picture of this intricate term. In short, the science of elective affinity was then what chemical thermodynamics and quantum chemistry are now, the latter two have supplanted the former.

In sum, this is a big topic, certainly more of the needs storyline in it, e.g. here’s the German Wiki version (English Google translation), but my efforts are only to clarify both the book and the theory used to write the book. I hope this helps. I’ll try to make the article better soon. --Sadi Carnot 00:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 29 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article human chemistry, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 14:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Cara, thanks for the help! --Sadi Carnot 15:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Love

One user who is blocked did all the recent vandalism. It's not really that bad. It would just be nice if people didn't all the sudden panic when a page is unprotected. It's not the end of the world. I'm not going to reprotect, but you are free to ask another admin, although most wouldn't reprotect one day after unprotecting. -Royalguard11(T·R!) 18:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

R.G. thanks anyway, I've asked other admins before. I just think that certain pages should be perm-protected. If you change your mind let me know. --Sadi Carnot 00:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 2 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article human molecule, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 22:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again, keep up the good work. --Sadi Carnot 00:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Human chemistry

An article that you have been involved in editing, Human chemistry, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Human chemistry. Thank you. TreeKittens 06:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, I admire your magnanimous approach, well done for doing what is best for Misplaced Pages despite the personal annoyance this must cause. I've already raised this at the admin noiceboard but don't want to do this myself since I was part of the discussion. Do you want the material copied to a user sub-page before the history becomes unaccessible? All the best. Tim Vickers 19:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Human-element-dow-photo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Human-element-dow-photo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kkmurray 02:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)