User talk:Nergaal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please click here to leave me a message. Thanks.

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		Hey Nergaal. Just thought you should get some recognition for getting Planet up to FA level. :-) It was a bit of a slog, but you stuck with it. Congratulations!Serendi^podous 09:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		For getting Dwarf Planet to FA, and expanding the brag sheet of the now defunct ACID. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 16:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2

[edit] Oxygen and FAC

To answer your question: Tomorrow, I plan to finish-up all the points I feel are keeping this article from a successful FAC. I just finished summarizing ==Biological role== and plan to do the same for ==Compounds== tomorrow. I'll then conduct a copyedit pass and make sure the lead properly summarizes the article. Finally, I will put the article up for simultaneous Peer Review and Chemistry Peer Review for a week, asking what else needs to be done before FAC. Only after that will I nominate the article for FAC. --mav (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations

I just wanted to say congrats on a successful FAC for Ununoctium. Thingg^⊕^⊗ 21:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Let me add my congratulations, and to let you know that I responded to your comment on my talk page with the following: "Hi Nergaal, I did notice that you had gone through my comments, but I didn't reply as I didn't really have more to add. When I first commented, I had two issues - content, and whether it was suitable to be an FA given the narrowness of the topic. So, I commented on the content issues, and didn't vote to Support or Oppose because I think I'm too new to be sure about my FA concern. I was going to add a comment to this effect, but found that a decision had been made to promote. I am pleased for you that it was granted FA status (congratulations!) and will bear this example in mind in future cases. Cheers." EdChem (talk) 11:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dwarf planet GA passed

Congratulations! I just passed Dwarf planet on its GA inspection. A full review is on the article's talk page. Codharris (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Anyone working on the Solar System featured topic

Please come settle the current debate raging over there. Thank you. Serendi^podous 11:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Planet 2

Congradulations on getting Planet featured. I looked over it, and found it a good article, and supported it's FAC. Congradulations again, Basketball 110 _{the pages I've messed up completely} 00:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reliable Source

Hi, please have a look in Corneliu Zelea Codreanu article, the User:Dahn is replacing documents and facts with his personal opinion. Adrianzax (talk) 12:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Element infobox templates

Is it your intent to create separate infobox templates for each of the elements and, if so, would you like some help? JPG-GR (talk) 02:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:FAC of Dwarf Planet

It does indeed look better than it did last night. I made my full reply on its FAC. Thank you for reading my comments and trying to improve the article based on that. Juliancolton (Talk) 14:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Saying "probably does not qualify" needs to be sourced as being said by some1 on in a text, if it is a statement based apon other facts then it constitutes original research. Seddon69 (talk) 02:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Just to add what i said, if it states in the sources there that it "probably does not qualify" then you could move the sources to include that statement but only if it is clear in those sources that that statement is given. Seddon69 (talk) 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I am happier with the wording used now, im a little hesitant about it not being sources but if there was a source i would have no hesitation with any other sourcing problem in the article. I will have another look over the article and see if i have any other problems but i expect i should give my support soon. Seddon69 (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: featured articles

Thanks :0 ) But I just nominated Io; it was Volcanopele who did the work on it. Serendi ^pod ous 22:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: planet. I think the simplest thing to do is to briefly mention the ambiguity in the extrasolar section and link to the page you posted. Then maybe it would be a good idea to elaborate on it in the "inclination" subsection of Attributes. Serendi ^pod ous 11:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NUTS-RO

Now, do tell me, why you insist on having that map in the template? I would really like to know that! ES Vic (talk) 12:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rùm/Rum

Hello. I moved Rùm (island) back to Rùm. It is indeed a waste that Rum, without any accent, is not used at the moment except as a redirect to Rum (beverage), but that doesn't seem to be related. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks, Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats on Dwarf Planet

Just wanted to say congratulations on getting dwarf planet up to FA. Good job! Serendi ^pod ous 12:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

I mean one of the ones that are at the top right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedagomar (talk • contribs) 00:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I am going to assess it as is. i think I may have made a mistake as to need for a box. Geoff Plourde (talk) 00:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Buna

Ai un email cumva? AdrianCo (talk) 19:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Replied to your comment

I'm not really a wiki regular, so I just noticed your questions for me. You can find my reply here: 118 Discussion Mitchandre (talk) 01:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] International reaction to the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence

Hi there. I'm actually agnostic as to which version must be in place, between the one you reverted to, which is substantially what I left in place at the moment Maxim page-protected and froze editing, and the one Avala/ljanderson developed and put in place after editing was permitted again.

However, care should be taken, when reverting, not to lose undisputed improvements and additions other editors, including me, added in the interim. I suggest you clean up your edits, by going back, and putting in the stuff you omitted. This includes the addition of Zambia, the added information for Czech Republic, and the adjustment of reference for Iceland. There may be some other stuff, but I leave that to your care. Thanks and Best Wishes, --Mareklug ^talk 06:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree to your edits, but I expect my edits to be reverted for a while by some skewed editors. Once the bigger issue is settled, I will add those entries myself. Nergaal (talk) 15:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Liga IV and Liga V

Take a look at these articles created by User:Dan69en: Liga IV and Liga V. These levels do not exist in the Romanian football league system. Below Liga III there are the county football associations, each with its own league system.

User:Dan69en modified the Template:Football in Romania, adding Liga IV (2 divisions) and Liga V (2 divisions).

Even if you consider Liga IV to be the top level of the county football leagues, there are 42 divisions, not 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edgar81 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comment on content, not persons

I recommend you acquaint yourself with WP:NPA and try to contribute to Wikipedia in a more constructive way in the future. JdeJ (talk) 12:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Roma people

Hi. I just wanted to find out why you moved Roma people to Roma people (gypsies) without discussing it first? Given the discussion going on at Talk:Roma_people#Requested_move, it's probably best not to move the article without agreeing it first. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow or move it unilaterally while discussion about it is underway, as you did to Roma people. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk)

[edit] Salut

ai cumva un mail... as dori sa vorbesc ceva cu tine Rezistenta (talk) 16:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] chem Template

Is it possible to do a superscript (as in H⁺) with the chem Template? Plantsurfer (talk) 18:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You might want to head over to Talk: Planet

It's getting pretty weird over there and I could use some advice. Thanks. Serendi ^pod ous 19:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Romanian topics

Hi. Any thoughts on th is ? Ha! (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Science Collaboration of the Month

You voted for Carbon and this article is now the current Science Collaboration of the Month!
Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article.

NCurse _work 08:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Planet featured topic

A while back you seemed to be contemplating the possibility of a planet featured topic. I thought maybe it might be a good idea, and I wondered if you were still interested. There are quite a few possible options for creating such a topic, but you've already laid out the foundations.

Featured/good articles that could go in:

Planet (this would be the main article, obviously)

Articles we would need to get up to at least GA class before we could announce the topic:

2006 definition of planet
Cleared the neighbourhood
Gas giant (this article really needs attention; it's a joke)
Terrestrial planet
Minor planet

What do you think? Serendi ^pod ous 13:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I think 2006 definition... can be raised to GA without too much trouble. Minor planet will be a LOT harder; I think a case could be made for it to be merged with asteroid, since the terms were initially synonymous anyway. Serendi ^pod ous 10:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you're getting "minor planet" confused with small solar system body. That would be even harder to get up to code, perhaps impossible. Serendi ^pod ous 11:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a start. I've listed my reasons for the minor planet/asteroid merge on the discussion page. If no one responds in a week or so I'll just go ahead with it. Serendi ^pod ous 11:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Discoveries of the chemical elements

Have you thought of submitting this article to WP:FLC? It looks like an excellent list, and I would love to see it pass. Let me know if you need help with anything. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 15:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, great start anyways. I sincerely hope to see it as an FL one day, as it is obvious that you have put a lot of work in it and I think it is an important list. Gary King (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Since we are discussing chemistry already, would you be interested in reviewing Noble gas for GAN? Gary King (talk) 20:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: GAN:Noble gas

I will look it over. Please add references to information that you add to the article, because frankly, it is more difficult (at least, for me) to find references for scientific topics. Gary King (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, why was this edit made? Could you link me to the discussion at WikiProject Elements that upgraded the article? Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Ha? Did you read the tab on the articles by quality? Nergaal (talk) 09:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Tungsten

Hi! Replied on my talk. delldot talk 09:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey again, left a couple comments on Talk:Tungsten. delldot talk 10:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)