User talk:Physchim62

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The large wet haddock, which keeps a eye on Physchim62's administrative actions, believes that a warning about personal attacks is not in itself a personal attack under WP:NPA policy. Please calm down before leaving such messages here.

→Archive 2005
→Archive 2006
→Archive 2007

[edit] template:Chembox new question

The "SolubleOther" field together with the "Solvent" field can document no more than one solvent. When you put in more than one, you only see the last one. Do you know what the method is for doing more than one solvent (e.g., documenting solubility in ethanol and in chloroform)? Karl Hahn (T) (C) 02:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

This was a very difficult bug to fix, and it wasn't me who found the solution so I can't remember all the details. If I remember correctly, you should use Solubility1, Solubility2 etc. and Solvent1, Solvent2 etc. when you have more than one additional solvant. Physchim62 (talk) 13:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sysop flag

As a Steward for the Wikimedia Foundation Project, I've cleared the bit for your sysop status. First of all, thank you for your work as an administrator, and, if you've changed your mind, please just contact me. Ciao, M/ (talk) 14:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Sysop tools are very weak compared to the power of a well-equipped brain. I hope you will stay PS62. There is much good you can do. - Jehochman ^Talk 19:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

:( --Prodego ^talk 02:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Ditto :) FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 13:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ...yes they are

Hi Physchim. I only wanted to state now my respect for your contributions so far, specially for your GREAT handling of Valencian Community rotten issue. That used to be utter CRAP and, after you re-painted, refurbished it, I left (and the double-faced troll I had attached left subsequently), it remains more or less calm ever since (maybe because out of exhaustion of the contendants, I guess...BTW, maybe I should pay a look in there :D). I havent seen a case of such a major improvement in an article to date other than this one, and you have a great share of the credit there. Hope you are not quitting completely....but, hey, after all....no one does anyway ;) • Mountolive ^{J'espère que tu t'es lavé les mains avant de me toucher} 19:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Nearly all of us have said the tools are no big deal. Few of us who've had them have walked that walk. If you'd like to stroll with me I'm easy to find. Best wishes. Durova^Charge! 19:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Physchim62, grill that large wet haddock for Nadal. There's a lot of work here, and you have experience. Best.

BTW: Durova, Elmo is waiting for you. Please, put him a face! =D --Call me Elmo ^{Sesame Street} 21:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you know that all of us at WP:CHEM have REALLY appreciated your work in chemistry for several years, and we hope that you can continue to make valuable contributions there. I deliberately avoided becoming an admin, because I think it's all too easy to spend a lot of time caught up with the politics, trolls, sockpuppets, etc. I think you can have far more impact on the world by improving and organising the chemistry content on Wikipedia, something which you are very good at and where your work is welcomed by all. That's the stuff that really matters. All the best, and Happy Christmas Walkerma (talk) 17:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

• Same here! Happy Christmas and I hope you will continue to contribute to chemistry V8rik (talk) 16:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas

You got a Christmas card! → → →

♪ ♫ I wish you the merriest, ♫ the merriest, the merriest, ♪ the merriest to you... ♪♫ I wish you the happiest, the happiest... the happiest, yes the happiest. ♫♪... Bon Nadal i Bon Any ... ♪ I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Cheers. --Owdki talk 00:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

My own preference is for the caganer of Letizia Ortiz, but please don't tell that to the judges at the Audiencia Nacional! Physchim62 (talk) 14:27, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I Visc a Catalunya! Physchim62 (talk) 13:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

XD Hahahaha... Oh, shit! Letizia! XD Shitting!!! Beware of the prince! =D I use the classic: that's the way you spare yourself bedlams.

=P I hope to have enough time to live everywhere (the more places, the better) ;) P, best wishes for 2008!!!! --Owdki ^talk 23:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC) Hey: listen those people: KEEEEP OOOOOON!!!!

[edit] Feeling burned out?

Your comments on the RfAR talk page make it look like you're frustrated and about to explode. I know the situation is leaving you upset, but I urge you to take a walk and wikibreak and come back when you feel better. Regardless of the RfAR, you've been a big contributor to the project, I for one still want you here, and the situation really isn't so bad that you need to take off permanently.

I hope you'll take a break, reconsider, and come on back. Thanks... Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Physchim62

The above Arbitration case has closed, and the final decision can be viewed there. As indicated here, your administrator access was given up under controversial circumstances, and may only be regained through normal channels.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Anthøny 17:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lead(II) nitrate, back to FA?

Hi, PC, I've copy-edited the lead(II) nitrate article from the Chemicals wikiproject, after it was recentely demoted from its FA-status. Last time around, you contributed to the voting process. Would you please be so kind as to provide feedback in its now running FA re-candidacy? Wim van Dorst (talk) 18:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Template for InChIs

Could you take a look at Bromocresol purple, which is one I fixed from ChemSpiderMan's list of errors? I put in your lovely template, but it is so long it intrudes into the chembox. I wonder if you could add a "small=yes" type parameter to allow it to be in small font ()? If not, can you suggest something? Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 07:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I've just tried it in Internet Explorer 6.0, as it works OK. The only failsafe fix for this would be to place a <br clear="all"/> just before the box, so that it always starts on a new line: I shall wait for further input before making this change. Physchim62 (talk) 12:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Have just tried on Firefox 2.0 and have got the wrapping problem you describe. Physchim62 (talk) 19:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Arsenicum album

An article that you have been involved in editing, Arsenicum album, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arsenicum album. Thank you. TableManners^C·U·T 03:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inniscrone/Enniscrone

Hi. As someone who has edited the Inniscrone and/or Enniscrone page recently, you may be interested in this. Regards, --The.Q^(t)(c) 15:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Balearic Sea Vs. Catalan Sea

Hi there Physchim. I sadly have to tell you that user Toniher together with a new member (an annon user) of the CAT team have started reverting and vandalising another article such as Països Catalans. I know that you are also browned-off with these matters, but you know very well that if an admin is not around, this team freely starts reverting and undoing fully referenced matters. Every editor has expressed their opinion towards "Balearic Sea" (which is the name internationally accepted), but hese 2 users keep reverting to "Catalan Sea"

If you are not willing to participate anymore (something I understand after how they treated you), may you please at least report this matter to other admins in order to prevent another edit warring over the article?

Thanks in advance. And happy new year (a month late). --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 11:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Verbbox french

A tag has been placed on Template:Verbbox french requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Ourense municipalities

A tag has been placed on Template:Ourense municipalities requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Chembox/RSPhrases

A tag has been placed on Template:Chembox/RSPhrases requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Chembox/S298

A tag has been placed on Template:Chembox/S298 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Chembox/ThermoSuppl

A tag has been placed on Template:Chembox/ThermoSuppl requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Montserrat_virgin.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Montserrat_virgin.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 14:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

The image is now redundant to Image:Verge.jpg and should be deleted; thanks for reminding me! Physchim62 (talk) 16:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NFPA diamonds

I hope this isn't a red rag to a bull, but as you consider how to clean up safety data on WP you may want to look at Talk:Manganese_dioxide#NFPA_Rating. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 02:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:GFDL-presumed-ca

Template:GFDL-presumed-ca has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 20:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question on ozone

It seems you have a working knowledge of physics, and are interested in ozone... What creates Ozone (o3) and is it a finite "resource"? This started by a friend emailing an article from Georgetown on the rate of melanoma and new treatments for same... It got me thinking about what correlation the sunworshipping of the last 40 years and the rate of ozone depletion both have on the astronomical increase in melanoma... I think of "natural resources" like oil as being finite, for all practical purposes. Thanks... Curious.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bandera Sant Feliu de Codines.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Bandera Sant Feliu de Codines.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimedia España

Hi, just to check if you are aware of the revival of WM España we are trying now. If interested go to [1] cheers, Gaianauta (talk) 20:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I wasn't aware, but I'm interested in helping out as far as I can. Physchim62 (talk) 17:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Subpage talk redirects

I share your concern over the talk page redirects deleted by MZMcBride. I am restoring the ones I had created, but this time I am going to categorize them with {{R to documentation}}. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Double block by Pilotguy

Regarding your arbcom request statement, wasn't the second block just an adjustment of the initial block? Have a look here: (1) "account creation blocked, e-mail blocked" then (2) "fix email block which I believe was made by accident" then (3) "autoblock disabled". What I find strange is that Tawker didn't reblock as the block log implies he was going to do (I've read there was an IRC "discussion" raging at the time), and that the reblock was eventually 11 minutes later, by Pilotguy again. I think the unblock and second block are strange, but irrelevant compared to the first block. That is the one that really needs explaining. I didn't like the way MzMcBride responded to finding that talk page of threads about his deletions, but it wasn't something to block over. I do wonder though whether the block did affect MZMcBride's subsequent actions for the better. I guess we will never know. That's not a support for the block, by the way. I had no interest in blocking or unblocking, since MZMcBride had his own fate in his own hands at all times. Carcharoth (talk) 18:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I think MZMcBride acted stupidly, if not obsessively, in that we seem to agree. However, Pilotguy blocked indefinitely, and in the first case even blocked email contact… Far more than was necessary to resolve the problem, or even wait for discussion… ArbCom has previously sanctioned admins for much less, and I am interested as to whether they will do so in this case. At the very least, it should be a lesson for all admins against knee-jerk reactions. Physchim62 (talk) 18:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

RFAR?! What the hell is the point of that, are you trying to create more drama? We always block malfunctioning bots indefinitely, then they are unblocked when the problem is fixed. Do I really have to point out to you that "indefinite" does not mean "infinite"? --Cyde Weys 18:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Two things. Infinite blocks are rare (though I have seen them in the block log). It is more normal for indefinite blocks to be used both for permanent blocks of throwaway and abusive accounts, and for short-term "what shall we do here" situations (when it is unclear what block length is needed). In this case, I disagree that a block was needed in the first place, but I agree with Cyde that if the scripted deletions had started up again, the account should have been treated like a bot. The second point, about the filing of the arbcom case, is that Physchim was, IIRC, desysopped (or resigned, can't remember which) as the result of an arbcom case. In light of that, when he says things like "ArbCom has previously sanctioned admins for much less", it is natural to think that might be what he is referring to. I actually sympathise with him if he feels that this case is similar to his, but this is not the way to go about it. If this is not the case, Physchim, please accept my apologies. Carcharoth (talk) 20:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The phrase is "resigned under contraversial circumstances" ;) Nevertheless, I have a certain record (from well before that particular case) of opposing blocks which I think are excessive in the circumstances, and of rejecting the idea of "automatic sanctions" as an excuse for admins who don't want to have to think about their actions. If I happen to expose the hypocrisy of certain people who claim to represent the Wikipedia community, the sobeit, but I have much better things to do with my time than to make that a primary goal! Physchim62 (talk) 18:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)