|Adrian J. Hunter|
|Editor of the Week |
for the week beginning June 12, 2016
|An editor who started editing in August 2006, a dedicated WikiGnome who helps wherever he can|
|Work at the Help Desk|
|Editor of the Week|
|Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week for your courteous help at the Help Desk. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)|
User:Worm That Turned submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
((subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box))
Thanks again for your efforts! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello Adrian. I have left a response for you at Talk:Penicillin#Penicillin production today. (You asked that question in 2007, but it might still interest you.) --David Göthberg (talk) 11:59, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I have a question. On Wikipedia, are reality stars considered actors? The way I see it, acting in a reality TV for years requires some acting talent. Just wanting to know for sure. Israell (talk) 16:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I just wanted to thank you for your input on the interactive gene structure diagrams. I put you in the acknowledgements in the recent WikiJournal article (here)! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 10:09, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi! Thank you for bringing the unintended edits to my attention. I do not recall editing the articles 'Pentose phosphate pathway' and 'Chlorophyll b', and I have no idea what has happened or which part has been revised. Please help me revert the articles to their original state. EverythingCountsInLargeAmounts (talk) 01:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks again, AJH! EverythingCountsInLargeAmounts (talk) 17:47, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:03, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
After loss of the argument at the local level, regarding the first-time-to-appear, self-publication of medical imagery here, followed by imposition of a topic ban in my absence to disallow me to tag plagiarised and other policy- and guideline-violating content—I give up. I wish you well here, and if I manage to make a successful case, top-down, you will certainly here of it. In the mean time, the wasted time devoted to change from the grassroots is at an end. Cheers, bonne chance, perhaps we will cross paths at a meeting in the real world. Le Prof 22.214.171.124 (talk) 22:28, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello there, you have spoken against my template Template:Di. This template is the only template for difflinks that uses the internal wikilinks which make it possible to immediately verify that an internal link is present, as opposed to the templates Diff and Diff2-4. Hence, please don't delete it, but use it. --Mathmensch (talk) 18:29, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Standard Life logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Adrian J. Hunter. Re your question in the summary for this edit, you're technically right, but I had to view it in its original size on Commons to see the overlap. The thumbnail view in the article shows no overlap for me, using two different browsers and two separate monitors. Are you seeing overlap? In any event, I suspect a crop might do more harm than good because the repeated portions aren't quite identical (for instance, look at the spire of the Chrysler Building). RivertorchFIREWATER 05:54, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
|The Technical Barnstar|
|Thanks for helping me figure out that diff thing. A significant improvement. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)|
|The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar|
|This barnstar is awarded to Adrian J. Hunter for copy edits totaling over 8,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE January 2018 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk (talk) 04:41, 8 February 2018 (UTC)|
If you read the study in which you site, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3200172/ , it states in "conclusions": Evidence is improving in quantity, quality and reporting, but more research is needed, particularly for Shiatsu...
Shiatsu is a vague frame of practice. There are different styles of shiatsu, some much much older and more effective than others. I, myself, practice one of these very old styles. I use this art and treat professional athletes, doctors, and many different clients with different ailments in the Seattle, Washington area. What I do is practiced by less than 20 practitioners in the world and has been passed down through a small group of individuals for over 30 generations. If studies through Shiatsu are based solely on the newer generation of practitioners, then your conclusions will be weak, to say the very least. They incorporate a style that is based more on massage then true Shiatsu practices. These true practices are based on old theories in Traditional Chinese Medicine. When incorporated, Shiatsu helps the body to heal. The human body battles numerous variables in its challenge to heal and keep the body healthy. Shiatsu simply helps that process to be more efficient using techniques that are not, by any means, "magical" or "hard to believe". The right techniques are very easy to understand, and most importantly, noticeable immediately.
True Shiatsu is not efficiently researched. The variables needed to understand what Shiatsu is doing is simple but asks those studying the practice to look at the body differently then most would. This is ultimately why the minimal amount of research specifically on Shiatsu (There were only 9 studies done in your study your site) is unclear and incomplete.
Plain and simple: More research... BETTER research needs to be conducted. The right individuals need to be studied. The same goes for anything not fully understood.
2603:3023:127:F900:F948:4C25:FE02:33F3 (talk) 06:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Adrian; thanks for being such a kind voice throughout. I think it best to leave this here until an independent party closes the RFC. Someone outside of us has to decide what consensus exists at the RFC. I am not sure if it is possible for @Doc James: to inquire at WP:AN if an admin might make an early close? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:02, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Dogs for Good logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Was looking at the wrong version of that source... Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:05, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
|The Teamwork Barnstar|
|I love the way you both met the immediate need and also explained how to do it. Now a lot more people know that this is possible and can try it out themselves. Thanks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:47, 6 June 2019 (UTC)|
Thank you, WhatamIdoing! That's very kind of you. I'm surprised experienced Wikipedians don't all know about the Wayback Machine, actually. It's such a useful tool. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 13:44, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up about http://sumsearch.org/cite/ . Let me know if the Citation Maker needs further revision. Robert Badgett 15:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC) Your providing the solution helped much. Robert Badgett 01:08, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Rather than charging me with that. Honestly it's just lazy editing and it's often particularly charged at IPs as second class editors. --2001:8003:7CE4:4F00:391D:5AA3:9B7B:9483 (talk) 12:37, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
|Barnstar of Royal Fiat|
|Thank you for making me smile. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)|
Ha, thanks WhatamIdoing for making me laugh with the cutsie barnstar! Seriously though, things would run a lot smoother around here if I were empowered to unilaterally declare new rules whenever the whim struck me. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 10:14, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Template:Dopey has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:40, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
|The 2019 Cure Award|
|In 2019 you were one of the top ~300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a thematic organization whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.|
In 2018, you offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has now accepted that request for arbitration, and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.
All content, links, and diffs from the original ARC and the latest ARC are being read into the evidence for this case.
The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: firstname.lastname@example.org
For the Arbitration Committee, CThomas3 (talk) 17:41, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
I've noticed in a few arbcom cases that an editor's "positive" contributions should be taken into consideration. What is interesting to me, and what your comment show, is that there is no way to measure the net loss to the project of driving off editors who would have been valuable contributors. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 12:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing—Carbon dioxide equivalent—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:16, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
— Amakuru (talk) 00:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
You are recipient no. 2634 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:34, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
You did not get a response to this question. Did you find the answer anywhere? It's not something I would know how to answer, but you could try WP:VPT and maybe they can answer a question like that.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I strongly apologise to bother you, but if you do not mind, I would like to ask a question regarding the article Transposable element. I believe it should include some information on the so-called Class III TEs (see: Pierre Capy et al., Dynamics and Evolution of Transposable Elements, 1998).
a grab-bag consisting of transposons that don't clearly fit into the other two categories, and added:
Examples include the "Foldback" elements in fruit flies, the "Tu" elements in sea urchins, and "MITEs", or "miniature inverted repeat transposable elements", which are found mainly in plants and fungi.
If you find some time, could you briefly describe Class III TEs, please? Since you are an expert in the field of genetics and an experienced Wikipedia user, I decided to rely on your knowledge here. Thank you very much. Kind regards, --Pinoczet (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2021 (UTC)