This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:IMAGES. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:IMAGESredirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Mhiji (talk) 18:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I have proposed the renaming of a category, and wanted to know if you would consider commenting on the proposed renaming over at that link. ---My Core Competency is Competency (talk) 04:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Fvasconcellos, I have unprotected the above article per a request at WP:RFPP. If there were any circumstances that required indefinite full protection and that I was unaware of, please let me know or reverse my action. Thanks, Dabomb87(talk) 23:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
An RfC/U about AlexCovarrubias (talk · contribs) has been filed - I know you have expressed concerns about his conduct at a previous time and encourage you to participate.·Maunus·ƛ· 15:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
18 Feb 2011
Dear Fvasconcellos,
I'm a year 2 student studying Chemistry in the University of Hong Kong. I'm writing a journal article about the common acne-treating ingredients and I would like to ask for the permission to use the photos in the following article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Salicylic-acid-skeletal.svg
The permission letter is required during submission of the article. Look forward to your kind reply of this message. Thank you in advance for your generous permission and attention.
Yours sincerely,
Luna Chung Ying Ting BSc Year II, HKU 147.8.126.67 (talk) 08:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Liquigen edit.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email topermissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Saibo (Δ) 15:35, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you both for your help! Generally derivatives from files on Commons should be uploaded on Commons. If the modification is minor and it can be assumed that noone likes to use the original version you could just upload a new file version. Or go tocommons:Commons:Upload and select "It is a derivative work of one or several files from Commons" to upload under a new file name.
In this case I think it would be okay to just upload the derivative as a new version. If you both agree I will do it and will also do the documentation (author, "retouched", ...). Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 17:37, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey FV. There seemed to be general consensus to move the history section to near the end. Many of my suggestions have been soundly turned down :-) and I agree some where not that well though out... Will not thus push these further. There are still a couple of things I would like to see / discuss further 1) some further links added to the drugbox (medline plus and AHFS) 2) the possibility of having captions for the image in this box 3) moving the clinical information a little up in said box 4) some consensus on a consistent layout across articles best formatted to reflect the literature and appeal to a general audience CheersDoc James (talk ·contribs · email) 22:38, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey Fva, long time no talk. How would you translate "[The battleship Minas Gerais] cuja quilha foi batida em 17 de abril de 1907, lançado ao mar em 10 de setembro de 1908, Mostra de Armamento em 26 de abril de 1910 e incorporado à Marinha do Brasil pelo Aviso Ministerial nº 1.827 de 18 de abril de 1910."? Google Translate is confusing me a bit. Is this saying the ship was commissioned on 18 April? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:18, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Wondering if you would be able to comment further here Template_talk:Drugbox#Add_clinical_data_to_the_drugboxDoc James (talk ·contribs · email) 17:57, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Vc é o único adm brasileiro na Wiki-en? MachoCarioca (talk) 01:49, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
I, Mikhailov Kusserow, hereby awardFvasconcellos with The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for reverting vandalism to my talk page. —Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 08:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC) |
hello! i would like to ask you if you could create new national flag of serbs outside serbia remaking this flag http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_the_Serbian_Orthodox_Church.svg into proportions of this flag http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Serb_flag_with_cross_and_firesteels.svg —Preceding unsigned comment added by77.239.11.239 (talk) 15:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Nah its just that first flag isnt made with normal letters C but with stylish byzantine style like on the official church flag and that needed changing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.239.11.239 (talk) 11:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much,could you just please add it onto this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Only_Unity_Saves_the_Serbs —Preceding unsigned comment added by77.239.11.239 (talk) 16:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments. Ronhjones (Talk)22:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:14, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Recently you updated File:Ondansetron skeletal.svg to remove a double bond from the center ring. But based on the ChemSpider and PubChem links in the article, I think it was right the first time. Can you please take a second look? ChemNerd (talk) 12:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Dear Mr Vasconcellos:
I understand your typographic intent, but your inaccurate textual corrections have dumbed down the article. In medical writing, my field, "accumulate" is not synonymous woth "build up", "placement" is not synonymous with "emplacement". Your identity as an administrator is fine with me, but, you do not know medical writing. The excuse about Wikipedia style is a non sequitor, given that you identified your changes as typographic, when, in fact, you are inserting editorial opinion. "According to the study" is an opinion, yours, whereas the original reports "the study indicates". Is it all right with you, may I have your permission, to correct your inaccurate substantive changes. The titles of studies quoted and noted are necessary to make the MEDICAL point; this is not a newspaper, nor a magazine article, where . . . surprise! surprise! surprsie! the writer inserts his opinion about the subject.
I reverted your sneaky substantive dumbing down, because this is a medical article, albeit one about which most everyone has an opinion, but, said opinions belong in the CRITICISM section, not snuck in throughout the TECHNICAL MEDICAL explanations. Please, remember, the article is about the Breast Implant MEDICAL DEVICE, not the sociology of the subject, that would be elsewhere.
I shall follow up, upon your kind reply. 99.88.108.102 (talk) 17:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello F, hope all is well. Thanks for the image on dengue fever. Unfortunately there have not yet been many responses on the FAC page, and I was wondering if you might find a minute to offer any remaining comments, and support if deemed appropriate.
It seems thyrotoxic periodic paralysis is on the main page tomorrow!JFW | T@lk 19:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
OOps, I am sorry, didn't know that you are talking over that structure...Cheers, --Yikrazuul (talk) 15:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
PS: And the funny thing is that the commons machine didn't recognize that we both were uploading the structure for the same time...--Yikrazuul (talk) 15:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
The forgeries by former "Goodson" are back in the article. I have no tool and not the nerve to track that back manually. Example: My recent two edits. Suddenly the KGB used it, suddenly temazepam was the most smuggled benzo, where in fact ref says diazepam. Can you take a look? Looks like a sock puppet of Goodson. 70.137.150.206 (talk) 07:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Ok, this is the guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Temazepam&action=historysubmit&diff=413576942&oldid=413576799 70.137.150.206 (talk) 07:45, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Its 24.57.69.193, he has done a whole lot of edits, essentially restoring the old version of Goodson, including all forgeries, which have been taken out in tedious work. This guy must not be playing with a full deck. I do not know why I have spent time on this, long time ago. Wiki is just a pile of junk with that kind of edits. Forget it. 70.137.150.206 (talk) 07:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't think you reverted the changes to Temazepam by this IP yet. I am disappointed by the perspectives of WP, there is probably no cure for this misrepresentation of sources, and I believe few people are willing to check against the refs. I feel the project is doomed for that reason. All the best, hope you have been well. 70.137.150.206 (talk) 09:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Here another one, benzos, zodiac, nazis etc. That also a sock of the same.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=24.57.149.85
I think I am in a mental institution. Orderly! Some Haldol for me please. Cheerio! Glugluglug! Aaaah, now I feel better. 70.137.150.206 (talk) 09:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Another one
IP 24.57.7.132
Changes nitrazepam to temazepam. This is also a restauration of old forgery. But it is a different IP. 70.137.150.206 (talk) 09:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Another one, different IP, same nonsense
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.57.77.186
Is this maybe the mental institution in Windsor, Ontario? And they have a lot of computers in the day room? With this kind of insiduous sabotage I have little hope. In particular I cannot see how to prevent it, except by really checking every edit against refs. And as you say, nobody except us poor old nutcases is willing and able to do it. If I only had work, I wouln't have the time to do it either. 70.137.150.206 (talk) 09:45, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Lucky you, my intelligent friend, if you have work. I envy you! 70.137.150.206 (talk) 10:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to disturb you, but can you check on Mbsetv15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)? There was already a concern about this user over at the talk page atWP:TAMBAY due to him making articles about TV shows that turn out to be hoaxes. Already reported this user at WP:UAA due toWP:CORPNAME. Please see the user page to know what I mean. Thanks in advance. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan)| talkback | contribs 07:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I was working on the artemisinin article and noticed that your structure differs from ; the latter is confirmed in other sources, e.g. [2] and [3]. Do you think we should delete your structure so as not to confuse other users of Commons? Cheers, AxelBoldt (talk) 22:02, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for looking at it. I am convinced, that almost every psychoactive article is full of misrepresentations of the kind of old friend. I am under the impression that almost every controversial topic on WP, like any abusable pills, is falling apart under the pressure of 1. zealots, e.g. anti addiction etc. 2. vandals for the fun of sabotage 3. idiots and dumb kids e.g. look mommy I'm high I snorted powderized pills from Grannies medicine cabinet and inserted them rectally. The same is the case with other controversial subjects like middle east politics. WP as a model experiment of gras roots amateur science shows a tendency towards political distortion. I believe no amount of policing can help that. Can you proofread Alprazolam against refs? I am only doing it as a mental broadband exercise, as long as I have no work. At least WP offers an opportunity to talk to intelligent people. Maybe it helps me to keep my mind flexible. 70.137.154.88 (talk) 07:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Could you please take a look at Alprazolam. This has been disrupted by 67.x.x and others and is now locked. The admin seems not to understand, 70.137.134.251 (talk) 19:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Alprazolam now in dispute resolution at here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard
could you take a look and maybe contribute? 70.137.159.49 (talk) 22:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
69.165.139.174 is misrepresenting refs there. Please take a look. I think this has been reverted 100 times. 70.137.158.132 (talk) 05:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
In Benzodiazepine overdose 69.165.139.174 has replaced "nitrazepam and flunitrazepam" from the ref by "temazepam", and "benzodiazepines" by "temazepam". Ref says no word about temazepam. This is insidious vandalism. Please proofread the statements against references in his changes. It was exactly cited to the reference before, he has done exactly the same before. It was reason for a deep revert. 70.137.158.132 (talk) 06:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
A good deal of the material, misrepresented refs, KGB has been reinserted in a bulk edit without discussion. I give up. 70.137.128.154 (talk) 16:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Still found this
and same in Convention on psychotropic substances. Wiki is infested with disinformation by this guy and others. 70.137.141.220 (talk) 10:27, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Fvasconcellos. In 2008, you assisted by converting the diagram of the oil shale productioninto svg format and loading it to commons. I has been contacted by the oil shale expert Alan Burnham (occasionally editing in the English Wikipedia as User:Akburnham) who has updated this diagram by adding data for 2000-2010. Unfortunately, this is not in the svg format and I myself don't have any knowledge how to convert this file and upload into Commons; therefore, I kindly ask your assistance. May I send this file to you (e.g. by e-mail) or maybe you could recommend somebody else who may help with this matter? Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 15:42, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Would you prefer messages here on en.wp talk regarding commons concerns or on your commons talkpage? Seems like you're more active here, not sure if you like keeping topics localized. DMacks (talk) 16:24, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Have done a cleanup of misrepresented refs, please take a look, help protect brutal edit from reversion. 70.137.144.56 (talk) 09:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
is back and changed convention of psychotropic substances and temazepam to bullshit. 70.137.131.90 (talk) 05:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
is back. Himmler, Heydrich, Nazi, Taipan, Temazepam. Now name= Sebastian80 or Bastian. See edits benzodiazepine misuse and benzodiazepine overdose continues where goodson/blocked left off. See talk:Sebastian80 70.137.158.141 (talk) 13:09, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Please note that there is a new freely accessible medical resource, MedMerits (to which I'm a medical advisor) on neurologic disorders. I sympathize with your being swamped with work. Check it out when you're back. Presto54 (talk) 17:51, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Fvasconcellos/Archive 27! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey |
Hello, Fvasconcellos. You helped me quite a lot before when I made Pedro II of Brazil a FAC. Since you're Brazilian and can write in English well enough I thought you could help once more. If you're interested, could you take a look at Luís Alves de Lima e Silva, Duke of Caxias and help me improve the article's prose? It is now a FAC. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 15:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
and great holidays. Enjoy those free days :) Best regards, --Yikrazuul (talk) 18:52, 23 December 2011 (UTC)