Hi Athel Cornish-Bowden! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like John from Idegon (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Athel cb! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Athel cb! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, How do I change my username?., has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing ((bots|deny=Muninnbot)) here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Athel cb! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Change introductory text, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing ((bots|deny=Muninnbot)) here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your recent edit appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. --VViking_TalkEdits 18:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"If the scientists have their own Wikipedia article, as everyone on the list already does, then this is enough to satisfy notability. If red links are added, they should be very well sourced so as to indicate potential article material." Per the Teashouse--VViking_TalkEdits 21:20, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am completely baffled by your refusal to allow Ignacio Tinoco Jr., which you have made no attempt to explain. As you must surely know, Tinoco does have his own Wikipedia article, in which you can see that he was a Member of the National Academy, that he received various prizes, was a Professor of the University of California at Berkeley, and had several distinguished students or postdoctoral fellows, such as Frances Arnold (Nobel Prize 2018), Charles Cantor and Carlos Bustamante. You haven't offered any coherent reason why you don't regard that as notable. Athel cb (talk) 05:49, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your great work on List of biochemists. Theroadislong (talk) 16:57, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar, but if you look at the paragraph below you'll see that another administrator does not regard my edits as "great work" but instead as "vandalism".Athel cb (talk) 07:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I returned this morning to the page on List of Biochemists that I have been working on since 11th June, when I was surprised to see that I had been blocked, for the following reason: "You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions." It took a while to understand what my crime was, but it appears to have been that I used hyphens (1883-1970) rather than en dashes (1883–1970) in new entries or entries that previously contained birth years but not death years. I should have realized that en dashes were used (as they always are in other stuff I write, for example, for journals and books), but I thought people were using hyphens and tried to follow them. It was certainly worthwhile to point out to me that I should use en dashes, as I shall do in the future (if there is a future), but to call it vandalism is surely extreme. If you really think that the edits I have made since 11th June are not "useful contributions" then you are welcome to restore the page to the state it was in before then and I shall go away. That way you'll get rid of at least 90 giants who created the subject in the 20th century, and restore around 40 people who contributed nothing significant -- fathers of actresses, purveyors of quack remedies, etc.Athel cb (talk) 07:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Already a year old, but since noone apparently answered, the block log of your account is empty, meaning that a block on an IP address range (that may not have targetted you) may have affected you. If this occurs again I suggest posting an unblock request on this talk page so that an administrator may potentially apply a temporary IP block exemption for your account. —PaleoNeonate – 15:06, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of biochemists, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albert Schatz. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Athel cb (talk) 07:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Brownsville, Brooklyn

added a link pointing to Robert Rosen

List of people from New York City

added a link pointing to Robert Rosen

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:04, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Athel cb! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, User names: why not more transparent?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing ((bots|deny=Muninnbot)) here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Pigsonthewing. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you unlinked one or more redlinks from Wilfred Backhouse Alexander. Often redlinks can be helpful, so we don't remove them just because they are red. They help improve Wikipedia by attracting editors to create needed articles.

In addition, clicking on the "What links here" special link (in the Wikipedia Toolbox at left) on a missing article shows how many—and which—articles depend on that article being created. This can help prioritize article creation. Redlinks are useful! Please only remove a redlink if you are pretty sure that it is to a non-notable topic and not likely ever to be created. Thanks! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:02, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am indeed "pretty sure that the link to" J. Duncan Wood "is not likely ever to be created". If you search for "J. Duncan Wood" on the web the only relevant hits will take you straight back to Horace Alexander. Why would anyone create a page about someone who is known only for one book? They can do, of course, and it may be deemed "notable", but if it is it will be the work of a moment to enclose J. Duncan Wood in [[ ]]. Anyway, for the moment I don't plan to undo your undo.Athel cb (talk) 18:23, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incidetally, do we know one another? Your name seems quite familiar, and not just from Wikipedia, and I see you are located in Birmingham, where I was until 1987 (at Birmingham University)..Athel cb (talk) 18:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Athel cb, I came here to inform you that I moved your teahouse post to the bottom because that's where new posts go and it looked like it was misplaced and did not receive any replies. Now it has done.

Please do not ask editors about their real world identity or try to make connections between an editor here and any real world person you think the editor may be. If the editor has enabled email communication, you may email the editor but asking about it on-wiki is strictly prohibited. Please familiarise yourself with WP:OUTING. I know from your posts to the teahouse that you actually wish all editors went by real names, however do note that many active editors will have worked on extremely controversial articles at some point, and outing them could put their and others' life in danger in the worst case. It does not matter if you are right or wrong, making the wrong connections could get the wrong person harmed in real life. So, please consider how serious it could be and recognise that it's not just an arbitrary rule. In this case, it looks like Andy Mabbett has more or less an open identity, so probably no harm done. But I thought I'd mention it nonetheless considering the importance of the issue and your declared preference for transparency as you mentioned at the Teahouse. I would encourage you to seek permission from Andy before discussing anything they've not explicitly made public on Wikipedia. It is a good idea to use email even if it's no secret you're discussing. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:27, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to follow on from the above point, I've removed your last statement (regarding your username etc) out of an abundance of caution, as some folks don't realize the implications of making such statements online. If you would prefer that I leave it there so Andy can see it, please ping me so I can restore the content. Primefac (talk) 17:54, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK. I'll be more careful in future. In 20 years frequenting news groups I've only rarely encountered doxing, and then only for very nasty people (which I hope I am not), and hardly ever even for them, so probably I underestimate the threat. I won't do it again. As for Pigsonthewing, if he knows me he won't have any trouble deciphering my posting name; if he doesn't he won't care. Athel cb (talk) 12:14, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alberto Sols, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

SL93 (talk) 00:28, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert Rosen (theoretical biologist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Life Itself.

That was already fixed when I checked. I should have realized (and checked) that there was no page for the book. So thanks.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Albery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jeremy Knowles.

Fixed. That was careless of me.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited British Biophysical Society, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Randall and Jean Thomas.

Fixed.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tsou plot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel E. Koshland.

Fixed Athel cb (talk) 08:05, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert A. Alberty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ATP.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:50, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

List of British scientists

added links pointing to William Paterson, Edward Palmer, John Latham, Robert May, William Jardine, William Kirby and Frederick Hutton

All fixed Athel cb (talk) 09:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited El Quisco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Molle.

Fixed Athel cb (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nadëb language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Papua.

Fixed. Athel cb (talk) 18:56, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:52, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of biologists, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robin Hill.

Fixed. Athel cb (talk) 08:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your clean-up work on biologists! I see you removed Hugh Lamprey from the List of biologists on the grounds that the article on him was so short that you felt a reader could not reasonably work out what biology he did. An obituary can be found here [1]. It seems he had various jobs, including director of the Serengeti Research Institute, got an OBE, and devised some methods of estimating game densities. There's another less useful obituary here [2]. He also supervised Tony Sinclair (biologist), and a google search finds lots of publications referring to him or by him. Would it be possible to put him back in the list? He's clearly a biologist, and clearly did a lot of work on African ecology? In the long run, I reckon the rather short article on him could be greatly improved if anyone has the time and energy to do it, so it'd be great if the link remained. Best wishes Elemimele (talk) 17:04, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have provisionally put him back but the article needs some work. I'll see what I can do myself on the basis of the obituaries and of Web of Science. Athel cb (talk 09:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to do this, but it needs more. Do you know of someone who can help (or can you do it yourself?)? Athel cb (talk) 09:27, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amino acid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Equilibrium.

Fixed. Athel cb (talk) 11:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of Fields Medal winners by university affiliation is important for many reasons. Fields Medal page already has a list of Field Medalists. The list provides information on Fields Medalists and their academic affiliations. The page is also linked with many university pages. For instance, the lead of Harvard and Princeton universities states that Harvard has 18 Fields Medalists and Princeton has 16 Fields Medalists; the information is on the basis of this list. Can you re-think your "vote" on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fields Medal winners by university affiliation? Ber31 (talk) 10:56, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ber31: I would recommend you keep these kind of discussions to the AfD discussion page where others can participate. I don’t think it’s good practice to individually ask editors to revise their vote seems to be WP:MERCY. Vladimir.copic (talk) 12:43, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the article on Zena Werb (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zena_Werb) there is a Living Person notice, but she is not a living person. I haven't found a way to remove it. Athel cb (talk) 16:27, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Three helpful people at the Teahouse helped me to deal with it. Thanks to them. Athel cb (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bad Mergentheim, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Julius Adler.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Route of Che, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Osorno and Samaipata.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert Brown (botanist, born 1773), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foxtail.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited William E. Castle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Knox College.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Henry Doubleday (entomologist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epping.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In case you'd not seen it, I've added some notes at the end of this section: Talk:Non-coding_DNA#Splitting_proposal. No worries if you'd already seen it, but I thought I'd ping you since there's been so much activity on that talkpage you might've missed it! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 06:55, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. No, I hadn't seen it. Athel cb (talk) 09:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Walther Flemming, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Prague.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this is received in good faith as my intention is in good faith and I simply note that your Babel box indicates native English. "his father converted from Jewish to Roman Catholic, but I know of no evidence that John Polanyi considered himself to be Jewish." One does not convert from "Jewish", one can be a Jewish Roman Catholic, one can be Jewish and believe Jesus is the Messiah. Someone being Jewish or identifying as a Jew does not necessarily imply any religious relationship. There's ample reliable sourcing regarding the list of Jewish winners. Whether or not one person should be on the list is a content dispute, not grounds for deletion. As for John Polyani, reliable sourcing shows he's indubitably of Jewish descent, as indicated, whether he should be on the list is about content not grounds for deletion. The overwhelming prevalence of members of that list have Jewish identities that are not in question. I request you reconsider your delete all !vote. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 01:13, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Prosper Garnot, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brest.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I left the following post in response to your post on my page regarding Victor Henri,

Personal attacks, trolling, and baiting are out of place here. As a relatively new editor at WP, Athel cb, you might benefit from contemplating our principles of assuming good faith and working in collaboration to create the best articles we can for our readers. Our editors do not own articles, nor are they expected to spend their time criticizing edits without errors in the fashion you have taken. If you can not abide these principles, WP might not be the place for you—your talents and intensity might be more useful in other venues—I suggest that you refrain from personal posts such as this and stick to collaborative work on articles. I have replied to your post only to encourage you to become a better WP editor. I have no intention to participate in a petty editor's war, and will not engage beyond this.

I hope my suggestion will help you to become a better WP editor. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 14:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Athel cb. Please revert your recent mass edits to remove database links from enzyme articles such as [3][4][5][6]. Whether intended or not the result was to remove the ((EC number)) templates that had been there previously and leave the pages with less information. I suggest converting them to <ref> if you wish. Invasive Spices (talk) 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree with you, but I was told by Boghog that they are contrary to Wikipedia guidelines, which are quite clear. "Please also note per Wikipedia:External links, External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article. Hence inserting [the link] in the body of the article is against the Wikipedia manual of style. It is also redundant since the link is now provided in the Infobox enzyme." The idea is apparently that information that is in the infobox should not be in the body of the article. Probably you should express your opinion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Infobox_enzyme#Link_to_ExplorEnz_request_4_July_2022 to see what the consensus is. For the moment I feel obliged to follow the Wikipedia manual of style. Athel cb (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now. Could you note in your edit summaries that these remain in the infobox and so are not being removed from the article?

I've been thinking about this all night. I fear I over-reacted to Boghog's suggestion -- removing the links shouldn't imply removing the text. In other words, there is no reason not to have "EC 4.2.3.9" (etc.) in the article if it's not a link. I'll put all those back today. I hope it won't take as long as taking them out took! However, when you get to my age there aren't a lot of other things to do all day. Athel cb (talk) 07:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the confusion. Yes, I agree that is no reason not to include the EC number in the lead sentence. Just remove the external link. The infobox contains the link. Cheers. Boghog (talk) 07:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to apologize -- I was the one who was confused.

Anyway, I've restored EC numbers to all 4.2.3.X articles. Let me know if you're not happy with how I've done it. Athel cb (talk) 13:49, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As you're both here and have some knowledge of enzyme articles, there is something I'd like to know your opinions about. A great many have a section entitled External Links that supposedly lead to National Library of Medicine records. Every single one of these (and I tried about 20) leads to a Record Not Found message. The example at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phyllocladan-16alpha-ol_synthase seems to have already had this section when it was created by Dcirovic in May 2013). Is it possible that these links were created mechanically without checking that they worked? Alternatively, has the National Library of Medicine changed its system so that links that worked in 2013 don't work now? Or maybe one has to be in the USA to access them (which I am not). Anyway, should all these sections just be deleted, or is there a way to rescue them. Athel cb (talk) 14:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The links definitely still work. See for example Alcohol dehydrogenase. The link is a simple database search that is automatically created for an EC number. The problem is that for many EC numbers, there are no citations in PubMed that have yet been cross referenced for those particular EC numbers, and hence "no results" is returned. This is a valid result, and while not as useful as if a list of citations were returned, it is still good to know. At some point in the future, cross referenced citations may be added these EC numbers, but as of today, there are no citations. Boghog (talk) 03:54, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I won't do anything for the moment. However, shouldn't the link be in the Infobox rather than in a separate section? Athel cb (talk) 08:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox is divided into four sections: (1) title, (2) identifiers, (3) databases, and (4) references. The PubMed search link created by the infobox and is located within part #4 of the infobox and therefore a part of the infobox. The references section is collapsed by default, so it might look like it is appended to the infobox, but it really is an integral part of the infobox. Boghog (talk) 09:46, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose that we could suppress the display of the PubMed link if it returns a null list of citations, but I do not know how to do that automatically. This could be done manually for each EC number, but would an enormous amount of work (((infobox enzyme))) is transcluded into ~5,000 pages), and this would have to be updated periodically, and therefore a maintaince headache. Finally there would always be a question when the last time the check were done to see if there were citations. I would always, always, always want a current, up-to-date search of PubMed to see the latest results even if it returned no results. In short, a lot of work for very little gain. Boghog (talk) 09:55, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited David Rittenberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Isotopic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for everything you do here. I saw your userpage and we need more academics who actually know what they're doing :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Athel cb (talk) 15:53, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Athel cb, I work for BeiGene and have a declared COI. I came across your activity on the article of BeiGene co-founder Xiaodong Wang (biochemist), and was hoping you would check out my edit request on the BeiGene Talk page. The edit request is simple updates and clarifications to the Intro and History sections. I would appreciate if you could implement them if you agree they improve the page.

Thank you! LexBGNE (talk) 20:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done! (I apologise for putting it there in the first place, in April 2022). Athel cb (talk) 07:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Émilien Dumas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ariège.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Athel cb (talk) 07:58, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:51, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Daniel Tauvry

added links pointing to Laval and Phthisis

Henri Padé

added a link pointing to Somme

Louis Jean Pierre Vieillot

added a link pointing to Buffon

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All done.

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Invertase, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 12:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I del'd the request. You can do the moves yourself. Just look in the history of the page for the previous edits of the request. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately that doesn't work, as detailed on the Teahouse:

In principle I should be able to use Move to correct these, but for the ones I have tried the system rejects them. For example, if I go to

Alpha,alpha-phosphotrehalase

and enter

α,α-Phosphotrehalase

as the new name, with Misspelled as the reason, pressing Move page gives

You do not have permission to Move, for the following reason:

The page "Alpha,alpha-phosphotrehalase" cannot be moved to "Α,α-Phosphotrehalase" because the title "Α,α-Phosphotrehalase" matches an entry (?!(User

Notice that I didn't write "Α,α-Phosphotrehalase"; the system just changed it. I don't have any idea what (?!(User means. Also it's not true: there is no article called Α,α-Phosphotrehalase.

Athel cb (talk) 17:15, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You say you have a large list. Try them all. If there are some you can do you should do them yourself. Since it's a large list, you may need to get a special page-mover bit set instead of requesting someone else do the work. This will circumvent the blacklist that is likely the cause of the moves not succeeding. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To add to UtherSRG's statement, with some of the titles you may move which gets blocked for the "You do not have permission..." reason, move them back here for a possible full-scale discussion on this. Intrisit (talk) 20:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Athel cb. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Primefac (talk) 11:34, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Glucan 1,4-α-glucosidasee, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer. (See section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 10:05, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This title arose from an error in the first place, so it's perfectly OK to delete it. Athel cb (talk) 10:54, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Athel cb!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article you created to Draft:Bernard Horecker (biochemist) where you can continue to work on it. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 13:26, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand what this means. In the past (as recently as early August) I could create new articles by selecting 'or you may create the page "xxx" directly'. By accident I found myself on the Wikipedia Article Wizard, which is NOT where I wanted to be, and I found it difficult to escape. What I really want to do is to create an article "Bernard Horecker" (omitting "(biochemist")) but I added the "(biochemist)" in the forlorn hope of escaping the draft status, as there was already a draft article called that "Bernard Horecker" that I had created earlier today. Is there any way I can use 'or you may create the page "Bernard Horecker" directly', or is that option now closed? I am an experienced editor (for more than three years): I have created 12 new articles, one template, two disambiguating pages and many redirection pages; I had page-mover rights earlier this year, and renamed many existing articles. Of my more than 15,000 edits extremely few (probably fewer than 10) have been reverted or contested by other editors. Athel cb (talk) 13:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing to do is to complete the article in draftspace and move it to mainspace later. I would strongly advise you against creating any articles that do not have references. And if you've now got two drafts about the same person, I suggest that you request one of them be deleted as a duplicate. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 14:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added many references to the article and edited the whole of the text. (As indicated in my original editing comment it was always my intention to do that, and most of it would have been done on Friday if that had not been interrupted by the move to draftspace.) Another editor has removed the links to prabook, and I have no objection to that. It seems to me that it is now much more than a draft, and I should appreciate it if you would move it back to mainspace, something that I'm apparently not allowed to do myself, at the same time dropping " (biochemist)" from the title. As soon as it gets into mainspace I plan to add many links to it from other articles, starting with List of Biochemists, and continuing with the many articles on biochemistry and biochemists that refer to Bernard Horecker. Athel cb (talk) 16:19, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 16:04, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what is so wicked about letting people know that their work has been cancelled, but if that is “canvassing” then I won't do it again. How are they going to know if no one tells them? How do you think that I knew about the decision if no one had told me? I knew because the subject of an article that I had edited, but not himself an editor, was very upset that mention of the person who had influenced him in his work had been suppressed.

On the other hand you should refrain from labelling as “abuse” something that is not by any stretch of imagination abusive. I'm thinking, of course, of your remark about the article on Albert Einstein -- maybe too long, maybe some entries that would better omitted, but not abuse. I don't think that “abuse” means what you think it means. Athel cb (talk) 16:56, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that you seemed to be handpicking editors that might support your cause, based on their previous actions. Also, the notification message was not neutral. Appropriate ways to getting more people involved are given in WP:APPNOTE.

Personally, I would not have chosen word 'abuse' to describe the misuse or bad usage of the field. But in Einstein's case it was, in the sense that it did not comform to the documentation of that field, which adviced that the number of influences should be kept small (2-3 at max). Instead, we had a kilometer long list and statements such as 'virtually all modern physicists', his friend Besso and so on.

Nothing is suppressed by the removal of this information from the box. It can and should still be mentioned in the main text, and can also be given some context there. No reason to be upset over such matters. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 20:40, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Julia Bell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medical Research Council.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:05, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Martin Henry Dawson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rockefeller Institute.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Elaine Fuchs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Howard Green.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited L. C. Dunn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Buffalo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]