User talk:Epastore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Epastore, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Jacoplane 22:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Word origins on disambiguation pages

Hello Epastore, Your addition to Matrix regarding the word derivations was very informative, however, since Matrix is a disambiguation page, it does not belong there, and I wanted to let you know why I removed it. Disambiguation pages are used to direct people to different articles when there are multiple uses for a word. Except in rare cases, only the links to the different articles are included. The Manual of style for disambiguation pages dicates the style of disambiguation pages. While your word origin information was certainly informative, it is along the lines of something that would belong in a dictionary, and remember, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. However, consider adding your information to Wiktionary, where I am sure it would be most welcome. -- Natalya 19:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox Pseudoscience

Thank you for your efforts with Template:Infobox Pseudoscience. However, some of the formatting you tidied up was deliberate (lists didn't display correctly otherwise). I've restored the parts that were needed, while keeping the other parts that you'd changed that didn't interfere with rendering of the infobox. Further information is at Template talk:Infobox Pseudoscience.

Happy editing! --Christopher Thomas 20:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FleaCircus Review

Dear Epastore, thanks for reviewing the flea circus page, can you clarify which paragraphs specifically you believe are confusing and I'll look at revising them. Regards, Andy www.fleacircus.co.uk

Updated the flea circus page --Flea Circus Director 14:34, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] what a few edits can do

Cephalopod intelligence no longer reads like a middle-school essay. Thank you. — coelacan talk — 06:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Invite to Nursing wikiproject

Rod talk 21:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] OS X

We've already gone through this as per Talk:OS X. When more information is available, editors will decide on what to do with the page. Right now, more editors want it to be a simple redirect, so we should feel lucky it's even a disambig page. Roguegeek (talk) 02:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

You have already gone through this... but your edits are incorrect. In what way does a page from the manufacturer not constitute an official source?

[edit] AfD nomination of Snorkeling locations

I have nominated Snorkeling locations, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snorkeling locations. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aquatic ape hypothesis

Please note the discussion here. WLU (talk) 17:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Milk - emulsion or colloid

I'd like to discuss your edit changing the classification of milk to a sol colloid from an emulsion. Milk fat is a solid or a liquid, depending on the temperature. At the body temperature of a cow, milk fat is probably a liquid, or at least somewhere inbetween a liquid and a solid. Try leaving butter in your cupboard during a summer heat-wave! It is more solid at room and refridgerated temperatures. Not sure if this qualifies it as a sol colloid or not, but I don't believe the definition of an emulsion is contingent on it's physical state (e.g. liquid). Perhaps it fits both classifications, there is no reason that it couldn't, but it would depend on the temperature! Maybe the article should be written to reflect this, but some citations are necessary to back this up. I'm sure few people would disagree on the status of milk as an emulsion, and it is also a colloid. Here are some references in support of the definition of milk as an emulsion:

http://www.foodsci.uoguelph.ca/dairyedu/chem.html#lipids1

http://animsci.agrenv.mcgill.ca/courses/450/topics/2.html

http://classes.ansci.uiuc.edu/ansc438/Milkcompsynth/milkcomp_physicochem.html

http://www.nutrition.org.uk/home.asp?siteId=43&sectionId=427&parentSection=322&which=

http://books.google.ca/books?id=6Q8mX8DsDe4C&pg=PA104&lpg=PA104&dq=milk+emulsion&source=web&ots=kwFLmPM4zY&sig=FCFoffUs68vn4u0LX8agBu745ng&hl=en

I am changing it back to being called an emulsion, but adding that it can also be referred to as a colloid. If you want to add the sol definition, perhaps we need a little more than the sol colloid stub with no references to back this up.

Cheers, Halogenated (talk) 02:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

That works for me... I just wanted to resolve the difference in articles. I've updated Colloid to match. — Epastore (talk) 02:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Boy, it would have been nice if some of this discussion had been placed in the colloid page. I just editted it back to sol, and now find this discussion here. Sigh. The discussion of butter is interesting, because of course the colloid page is quite comfortable calling it a gel, despite it being an emulsion at the same temperatures at which milk is an emulsion.
Perhaps the wise thing is to remove dairy products from the illustrative table; surely the table is meant to inform and not to include confusing edge cases. - 63.107.91.99 (talk) 19:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] American Society of Consultant Pharmacists Foundation

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of American Society of Consultant Pharmacists Foundation, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.ascpfoundation.org. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of American Society of Consultant Pharmacists Foundation

I have nominated American Society of Consultant Pharmacists Foundation, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Society of Consultant Pharmacists Foundation. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Fallen Angel 00:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of American Society of Consultant Pharmacists Foundation

A tag has been placed on American Society of Consultant Pharmacists Foundation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters(Broken clamshellsOtter chirps) 00:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:R. Tim Webster.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:R. Tim Webster.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] epicaricacy

I was looking for the word epicaricacy, only to find it had been deleted. I'd like to put in a definition for the word, my workup is here: wikt:User:Evrik/epicaricacy. I found the archived deletion discussion. As you were a participant in the delete discussion, do you mind giving my work a review? --evrik (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)