For discussions on deletion, see User:Kmarinas86/Deletion (17 sections).

For discussions on fair use, see User:Kmarinas86/Fair use (4 sections).

For discussions on good article reviews I received, see User:Kmarinas86/GA reviews received (13 sections).

For discussions on good article reviews I sent, see User:Kmarinas86/GA reviews sent (8 sections).

For discussions on my template experiments, see User:Kmarinas86/Template experiments (4 sections, 3 subsections).

For discussions on un-linked files, see User:Kmarinas86/Orphanage (12 sections).

For discussions on un-sourced files, see User:Kmarinas86/Unspecified source (7 sections).

For discussions on the content of the Rael articles, see User:Kmarinas86/Rael articles (8 sections).

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Kmarinas86! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. You may also push the signature button

located above the edit window. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- Kukini 01:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting Help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Comments on Kmarinas86's User-space

User page

Hi KMarinas. Would you mind putting the {{userpage}} template at the top of your user page? Your page will appear in a google search, and we're worried that the less computer-literate of our readers may mistake it for an encyclopaedia article. Normally, wikipedia guidelines state that userpages are not for publishing personal essays, however you are an editor in good standing, and the material is both interesting and unoffensive, so there is no reason to delete it if the template is up. Thanks a lot. yandman 08:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

template added ;)Kmarinas86 14:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. yandman 14:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Kmarinas86, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Kmarinas86. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

See a log of files removed today here.

Shut off the bot here.

Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everything else

Entropy edits

Hello - can you give a list of your changes and some discussion on the Entropy talk page? I'm quite sure that they will be reverted unless there is some discussion, since the changes are so many and it's a page that is closely watched by a number of people. Thanks - PAR 04:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gravitational redshift

I added some contents at the top to this subject to give a better overview. Could you look at it? Thanks --Homy 17:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use talk:cult and talk:sect for off-topic discussions

These talk pages are only meant to suggest improvements for the article. They are not meant for theorizing about the subject. Thanks in advance. Andries 19:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entropy

Would you please explain on Talk:Entropy the purpose behind the many edits you have done today and what your last edit comment "(this is where it was dozens of posts ago)" means. Are you suggesting that all recent edits have been worthless? I am far too busy organising a Conference that is on this weekend, but I will get back to look at this article. I will say one thing however. That is that the first para has indeed gone back to being totally unintelligable to the average reader as opposed to being only partly unintelligable. This needs to be addressed. The first para should give the ordinary reader a real idea of what the article is about and perhaps they will then delve deeper. --Bduke 06:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Are you suggesting that all recent edits have been worthless?" nah. of course not!Kmarinas86 14:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entropy page restructuring

Your recent edits to entropy were certainly bold, and while I've no doubt that they were well intentioned, the page has been the subject of much editing and discussion by a number of editors. In cases such as this it is best to fully discuss and document changes: the restructuring is now under consideration at Talk:Entropy#Recent massive edits and it will be great if you can contribute to the discussion and to making this an excellent article. ... dave souza, talk 10:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for answering my question.;DPendo 4 20:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Pendo 4[reply]

Olbers paradox

Hello, KMarinas86! Would you be so kind to upload your own animation to wikimedia commons? I could use it in the Dutch Wikipedia: thanks a lot. I tried but didn't succeed. --Dartelaar [write me!] 20:26, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I learned that I had to download first your image to my pc and then upload it to Commons. Please check if I have done it right and correct data if you like. --Dartelaar [write me!] 00:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Thanks for providing more citations on Joseph Newman (inventor). Please note that if you cite a source multiple times, you need not repeat all the information in the cite multiple times. That's why we name the ref tags (preferably without spaces in the name). So if you have a citation like this: <ref name="invention">Citation information here, with links and such</ref>, then the next time you need that citation in the article, you need only write out the tag with the name like this: <ref name="invention" /> (note the terminating /> in the tag). -Amatulic 21:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Care to join our WikiProject?

Hello! As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Houston, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the University of Houston. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! Brianreading 20:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tango

You know when you've been tangoed!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 19:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Electric machines

File:A Working Newman Machine Replica 3.jpg

A Working Newman Machine Replica 3.jpg

As the article talk pages should concentrate on discussions central to the improvement of the article, I'll copy our little exchange about electric machines and efficency to your talk page, will briefly comment, and -- if you're interested -- discuss matters more thoroughly later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjacobi (talk • contribs) 15:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And just for the record, I (unsurprisingly) sincerely belief that not much new technology will come out of Newman's invention. Even leaving all the contradictions to physics aside, there is a much more pragmatic argument: Any electric motor design which "only" cut backs losses by 50% (going from 90% to 95% efficency) would be of outmost commercial importance. You would be able to go (with bodyguards and lawyers if you prefer) into the development centers of Siemens, EMD, or Bombardier, demonstrate your working prototype and leave as a very rich man.

--Pjacobi (talk) 01:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RI^2 = heat losses

RI*(meters/ohm) = current times distance = current momentum

Current momentum can be determined by integrating current along the length of wire (with dl as the derivative length). It can be found in the Biot-Savart law.

To maximize current momentum / heat losses, the following should be maximized:

RI*(meters/ohm) / RI^2 = (meters/ohm)/I = cross-sectional area of wire / (resistivity * current)

But current momentum produces the magnetic field, the square of which is proportional to its energy. So to maximize the energy of the magnetic field / heat loss.

R^2*I^2*(meters/ohm)^2 / RI^2 = R*(meters/ohm)^2 = distance^2/ohm

Just use a longer wire! I guess the mere acceleration of two opposite charges converts mass into energy, causing electromagnetic radiation. Even the simple movement of a charge can cause a magnetic field, causing acceleration, and therefore radiation! If the wire is so short, that is like shorting the battery (e.g. connecting them in series) and not using the charges to your advantage.Kmarinas86 (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so I'd like to start by saying that I may more or less completely misunderstand you, but (apart from a very good remark about the mass to energy conversion), your statements look rather heterodox to me. Granted, Newman would have to have found new physics to make his machine work, but I assume we are discussing textbook physics and EE in this side note. Specifically:

It's not the resistive (heat) losses (or other losses) which bound the electric motor's efficency to 100%. Even using a supraconducting coil and everything you wish, you won't get above 100% -- the counter voltage induced by the rotation will make the input power needed to sustain rotation equal to mechanical work done.

So is 100% efficiency a moving target? Will simply making your motor smaller, more powerful, lighter, etc. simply increase what the 100%-efficient power would be?Kmarinas86 (talk) 04:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Equal amount of copper will give you motors of equal parameters, only with voltages and currents scaled in different, compensating directions. E.g. both thse setups will give the same magnetic field and motor operation:
- 1 meter of 0,15 mm diameter copper wire (about 1 Ω) at 4 V and 4 A (stall current) and
- 4 meter of 0,075mm diameter copper wire (about 16 Ω) at 16 V and 1 A (stall current)
But I agree with your guess that the mere acceleration of two opposite charges converts mass into energy. Every time some energy is transported away from a system, the system loses mass according to E=mc² -- in most cases an unmeasurable low amount. Also if you temporarily attach strings to the oppositely charged bodies, you can extract mechanical energy while reducing their distance, exactly that amount of mass will be lost (If we keep the system isolated, its total mass stays the same, e.g when letting the two bodys clonking together, the energy will first be converted to kinectic energy, then to heat, and both contribute to the mass of the system, which in effect stays constant). But in a motor the movement is periodic, so there is nothing in sight which can result in mass loss -- unless some copper atoms are vanishing mysteriously or sort of transmutate into something other than normal copper.

Ouch. Not exactly briefly. Sorry. --Pjacobi (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok.Kmarinas86 (talk) 18:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Kmarinas86! You've written a long answer, but used HTML comments to make it invisible? I'm assuming, that you aren't finished with that one. Regarding the other remark: 100% a moving target => Getting 1W mechanical work out of 1W electrical energy is the absolute limiting target using textbook physics and electrical engineering. What is done in the manufacturers' research labs and written about in science and engineering journals is:

Getting nearer to 100%, reducing the amount of heat that must be carried away which often is the limiting factor at which power a device can be operated
Reducing size and weight for a specified power and efficency

--Pjacobi (talk) 19:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LAW 1: Magnetic field produced per current is proportional to the length of the conductor used by all that current.
LAW 2: Therefore, the magnetic field produced per electrical power is proportional to [length of conductor * current] / [current^2 * resistance], or simply [length of conductor] / [current * resistance].

Note I said product of current and resistance, not voltage, since doubling current can be done at the same resistance and voltage by putting two batteries in parallel.

LAW 3: The magnetic field energy produced per copper mass is proportional to the [length of conductor * current]^2 / [length of conductor * area cross-section of conductor]. This can be simplified as current^2 * [length of conductor / area cross-section of conductor].
LAW 4: The magnetic field energy divided by electrical power is proportional to [length of conductor*current]^2 / [current^2 * resistance] or length of conductor^2 / resistance. If length of conductor is proportional to resistance, then the magnetic field energy produced per electrical power is simply proportional to the length of that wire.
LAW 5: Magnetic field produced per mass of conductor is proportional to [length of conductor * current] / [length of conductor * area cross-section of conductor], or simply current / cross-section of conductor.

Default case: 1 meter of 0.15 mm diameter copper wire (about 1 Ω) at 4 V and 4 A. Produces 1x the magnetic field and 1x the magnetic field energy (see magnetic pressure).

LAW 1: Magnetic field / Electrical current = 100%

LAW 2: Magnetic field / Electrical power = 100%

LAW 3: Magnetic field energy / Copper mass = 100%

LAW 4: Magnetic field energy / Electrical power = 100%

LAW 5: Magnetic field / Copper mass = 100%

WIDE AND LONG: 4 meter of 0.30 mm diameter copper wire (about 1 Ω) at 4 V and 4 A. Produces 4x the magnetic field and 16x the magnetic field energy, lasting just as long. Electrical power is the same as default.

More for your electrical power, but average life.

LAW 1: Magnetic field / Electrical current = 400%

LAW 2: Magnetic field / Electrical power = 400%

LAW 3: Magnetic field energy / Copper mass = 100%

LAW 4: Magnetic field energy / Electrical power = 1600%

LAW 5: Magnetic field / Copper mass = 25%

LONG: 4 meter of 0.15 mm diameter copper wire (about 4 Ω) at 4 V and 1 A. Produces 1x the magnetic field and 1x the magnetic field energy, for 4 times as long (because current is 1/4th as much). Electrical power is 1/4th of default power.

More strength for your electrical power, less for your weight, but long life.

LAW 1: Magnetic field / Electrical current = 400%

LAW 2: Magnetic field / Electrical power = 400%

LAW 3: Magnetic field energy / Copper mass = 25%

LAW 4: Magnetic field energy / Electrical power = 400%

LAW 5: Magnetic field / Copper mass = 25%

Magnetic field / Copper mass = 100%

WIDE: 1 meter of 0.30 mm diameter copper wire (about 1/4 Ω) at 4 V and 16 A. Produces 4x the magnetic field and 16x the magnetic field energy, for 1/4th as long (because current is 4 times higher). Electrical power is 4 times the default power.

More strength for your electrical power/weight, but early death.

LAW 1: Magnetic field / Electrical current = 100%

LAW 2: Magnetic field / Electrical power = 100%

LAW 3: Magnetic field energy / Copper mass = 400%

LAW 4: Magnetic field energy / Electrical power = 400%

LAW 1: Magnetic field / Copper mass = 100%

THIN AND LONG: 4 meter of 0.075 mm diameter copper wire (about 16 Ω) at 4 V and 1/4 A. Produces 1/4x the magnetic field and 1/16x the magnetic field energy, for 16 times as long (because current is 16 times lower). Electrical power is 1/16th of default power.

Less strength for your weight, but long life.

LAW 1: Magnetic field / Electrical current = 100%

LAW 2: Magnetic field / Electrical power = 400%

LAW 3: Magnetic field energy / Copper mass = 6.25%

LAW 4: Magnetic field energy / Electrical power = 100%

LAW 5: Magnetic field / Copper mass = 25%

THIN: 1 meter of 0.075 mm diameter copper wire (about 4 Ω) at 4 V and 1 A. Produces 1/4x the magnetic field and 1/16x the magnetic field energy, for 4 times as long (because current is 4 times higher). Electrical power is 1/4th of default power.

Less strength for your electrical power/weight, but long life.

LAW 1: Magnetic field / Electrical current = 100%

LAW 2: Magnetic field / Electrical power = 100%

LAW 3: Magnetic field energy / Copper mass = 25%

LAW 4: Magnetic field energy / Electrical power = 25%

LAW 5: Magnetic field / Copper mass = 100%

Wow, what a hell of work you did to do all examples. I'll look at the details soon. But very generally speaking, I'm doubting you are taking the back reaction into account, i.e. the voltage induced by the rotating rotor. It's obviously proportinal to the number of turns. And it's that back reaction, which limit the efficiency to 100% -- the resistive losses only determine how far below 100% we'll end. --Pjacobi (talk) 22:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In short:

Magnetic field energy per electrical power is proportional to:

(current * length of wire)^2 / (current*voltage)

(current * length of wire)^2 / (current^2*resistance)

(current * length of wire)^2 / (current^2*resistivity*length/area cross section of wire)

length of wire^2 / (resistivity*length/area cross section of wire)

length of wire / (resistivity/area cross section of wire)

length of wire * area cross section of wire / resistivity

mass of wire / resistivity

Magnetic field energy per mass of wire is proportional to:

electrical power / resistivity

Magnetic field energy, therefore increases with the electrical power and the mass of the conductor. As such, there is some point at which the energy from the magnetic field exceeds the electrical power. The only way to justify this is to say that the energy comes from the mass of the conductor which is "excited" by electrical current.Kmarinas86 (talk) 20:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I now make the conclusion that all electric motors, not just Newman machines, convert mass into energy beyond that required to produce portable storage of electrical energy * (i.e. batteries). The conversion of mass into energy corresponds to simply the magnetic field that is produced and collapsed, similar to the concept of work done by expanding and contracting gases in a thermodynamic engine. The efficiency of this then would be determined by how much of that energy is usable and extracted by having a mass which interacts with this magnetic field, whether they be permanent magnets or electromagnets.Kmarinas86 (talk) 21:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doubling the mass of the wire can affect the electrical power depending on how you scale it. If you double its length, the power will be cut in half, while the total magnetic field will stay the same. This results in a energy efficient, but heavy, machine that is not suitable for portable power. This matches the specifications of a Newman machine which is not complemented by other devices.
If you use wire that has twice the cross-sectional area, you double the current and the magnetic field, quadrupling the power, but halve the life span, which doubles the total magnetic energy produced, but for twice the mass. This results in energy inefficient, and heavy machine that is suitable for portable power. This matches the specifications of large electric motors. These would be suitable for complementing a large Newman machine to power large vehicles.
Alternatively, you can use batteries that produce higher current (whether by parallel arrangement or greater voltage), which increases the current for a given coil, as well as increasing the total magnetic field per mass. This results in an energy inefficient, but light machine, that is suitable for highly mobile power. This matches the specifications of small electric motors. These would be suitable for complementing a small Newman machine to power small vehicles.

Kmarinas86 (talk) 22:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly fire

Sorry for getting snippy on the Newman talkpage the other day. — NRen2k5 08:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woah man, you’re on fire! The Newman Machine article hasn’t seen this much attention ~~in…~~ ever! — NRen2k5^(TALK), 13:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On magnet

Thanks for your units correction regarding the article Magnet. By the way, you come across as shocked and appalled to have discovered this error. Just so you know, there are errors everywhere in wikipedia's physics articles. The sense of shock will eventually wear off. But anyway, good work. :-) --Steve (talk) 21:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Scalar field theory (pseudoscience) appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. I have reverted your reversion as your don't seem to understand why I reverted it. WP is not a place to promote one person's point of view, it is an encyclopedia. WP asks for neutral third-party sources and your addition is sourced solely from the website of the person about whom you are writing. Find other sources to prove your point and I'll leave it alone. Frmatt (talk) 05:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Reformed GA Symbol.png

File:Reformed GA Symbol.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Reformed GA Symbol.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Reformed GA Symbol.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no support?

So I don't have your support? 0¹⁸ (talk) 13:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you do! Maybe I should add it back since you are concerned. :DKmarinas86 ^(6sin8karma) 21:32, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I just thought it was funny that you added that and then removed it. I'm not sure how valuable it is to have a comment that just says that it supports the previous one. 0¹⁸ (talk) 22:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 15:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't attack other editors in edit summaries

Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Aspartame controversy. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Your most recent edit summary at Flo McGarrell is of a similar vein. Edit summaries are especially problematic as what is written in the heat of the moment cannot be redacted. Novangelis (talk) 19:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for Campus Ambassadors in Houston

Hi! I'm leaving you this message because you are listed as a Wikipedian connected with the University of Houston. The Wikipedia Ambassador Program is currently looking for Campus Ambassadors to help with Wikipedia assignments at another Houston school, which will be participating in the Public Policy Initiative for the Spring 2011 semester. The role of Campus Ambassadors will be to provide face-to-face training and support for students on Wikipedia-related skills (how to edit articles, how to add references, etc.). This includes doing in-class presentations, running workshops and labs, possibly holding office hours, and in general providing in-person mentorship for students.

Prior Wikipedia skills are not required for the role, as training will be provided for all Campus Ambassadors (although, of course, being an experienced editor is a plus).

If you live in Houston and you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador, or know someone else from the area who might be, please email me or leave a message on my talk page.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:26, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Applying Kabbalah-50-50 to the Book of Revelation in italian...

In the last chapter You find the letters '-E-L-O-I-N-' (between parenthesis already in the text !)

http://letteredivine.angelfire.com/21-Apoc-W50.html (original italian official text approved by C.E.I.) --REDTURTLE 23:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Mislabeling of percentage rankings in graphic

In [1] the percentages seem to not fit the country rankings. I'm assuming that the percentage indicates the percentage of the world population and the associated number is the overall ranking in population size. Javirosa (talk) 01:28, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charts on the left:

Top: % Share of (World) Population from 1950 to 2010
Bottom: % Share of Population (of the present top ten most populated countries) from 1950 to 2010

Columns on the right:

--.-%: Population Growth in the 2000-2010 Decade (descending order)
#--: Rank by population size
-------: Continent/Country name

Notice how Russia's population growth rate is negative from 2000 to 2010 (last line).

Kmarinas86 (Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia) ^{19 9 14 karma = 19 9 14 talk = 86} 14:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing of Heat

You have made a very large number of edits in the article on Heat personally I find what you are doing as very confusing. The article is in desperate need of improvement. You made at least 12 edits in January this year alone; I find almost no relevant discussion in the Heat:talk page. The result is chaotic and obscure for all others, I do not think this is the objective of Wikipedia. Would you care to summarise what you have done in the Heat:talk page? This would let others know what you have in mind. Thanking you in advance. --Damorbel (talk) 08:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All my recent edits to that article were reverted last month.siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia
^{86 = 19 9 14 karma = 19 9 14 talk} 12:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

You somehow lead me to Frames of Reference, which is a concept I've meaning to look into. Thanks. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 21:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to take part in a pilot study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 18:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Nayah

Kmarinas86's note: The first edit to the English Wikipedia article about Nayah was translated from the French Wikipedia article (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayah). The IP of the person responsible for the copyright violation is 92.135.202.206 which is an IP in Paris, France (geobytes.com). Thank you and have a blessed day.siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia
^{86 = 19 9 14 karma = 19 9 14 talk} 12:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Nayah, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://membres.multimania.fr/nayah2003/english/body.htm. As a copyright violation, Nayah appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Nayah has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Nayah and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Nayah with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Nayah.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 04:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

studying for exams??

You wrote:

A lot of the higher mathematics articles would seem to be much ado about nothing, if it were not for its utility for those who are simply reviewing for higher level math exams.

Why would you say something like that? It is not only young people studying for exams that use Wikipedia's math articles; they are used by mature mathematicians as well. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Kmarinas86. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 01:39, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar

Hi there. I've come across a number of your internet posts, etc, regarding Mills' theory of classical physics. I share a similar interest, and it appears we are both around the same level of 'technical proficiency' with it. I'd love to discuss it with you sometime, if you're so inclined. My wiki page is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Eric_mit_1992

I am new to wikipedia user/editing, and I have no idea how one sends another member private message, etc. I'd rather discuss over email, etc. Anyway, feel free to drop me a line.

Eric mit 1992 (talk) 18:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cubic equations of state

Category:Cubic equations of state, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Brad7777 (talk) 08:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An article of interest to you is covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBPS

In WP:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to pseudoscience. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.

You're being notified of this Arbcom case due to your interest in Blacklight Power. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 06:43, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

posting personal information

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bhny (talk) 19:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely, until you can convince another admin that you won't violate the WP:OUTING policy that thoroughly again. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - as an oversighter I was asked to look over the (now suppressed) edits you made, and personally I think the indefinite block was the right call in this case. You made it fairly clear they considered your course of action necessary in order to defeat someone else entirely in an argument and therefore, while what they were doing could arguably have been seen as a good-faith action, I believe you would not hesitate to repeat the act in future. I would advise you to consider what you have done while they are blocked and appeal the block when you understand that your actions were inappropriate. — foxj 15:04, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appealed for the unblock yesterday. I am a waiting for a response from the administrator. That's all I want to say right now.

This is an automated message from the English Wikipedia Unblock Ticket Request System. In order for your appeal to be processed, you need to confirm that the email address you entered with your appeal is valid. To do this, simply click the link below. If you did not file an appeal then simply do nothing, and the appeal will be deleted.
http://toolserver.org/~unblock/p/reply.php?id=2917&[email protected]&token=9668bcb3521a8e72b35b9e63c39d659f083a03a82672af1d75dc154d3db57599"

Sincerely,siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia
^{86 = 19 9 14 karma = 19 9 14 talk} 14:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Kmarinas86 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

See above.

Accept reason:

per your request and subsequent discussion at WP:AN. Welcome back. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In need of expert opinion

Hello, there is a page in need of expert opinion. Could you please take a look at it? Albertlberman (talk) 12:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User page

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user page may not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline. If you believe that your userpage does not violate our guidelines, please leave a note on this page. As an alternative, you may add {{Db-userreq}} to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it, or you can simply edit the page so that it meets Wikipedia's userpage guidelines. Thank you. a13ean (talk) 05:24, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Posting of block text

Please do not post large blocks of quoted text as you have been doing at the BLP article. A link to the material is sufficient. Also, in case you are not aware, abstracts are not reliable sources, and may, or may not, accurately reflect the information in the given article. Thanks. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 21:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Category theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Field theory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:25, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stargen, random solar system generator

Hello, I would like to talk with you about Stargen,
If you have any interest and would like to spend the time,
please contact me at catan76(at)yahoo.ca Thanks.
http://fast-times.eldacur.com/StarGen/RunStarGen.html
For example, try Seed 27, Solar mass 1.392, moon option on. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.38.15 (talk) 03:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Covering group into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. IRWolfie- (talk) 21:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rants

Can you please keep your irrelevant rants off article talk pages, like the one here [2]. It is disruptive. See WP:NOTFORUM. IRWolfie- (talk) 19:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okie Dokie.siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia
^{86 = 19 9 14 karma = 19 9 14 talk} 22:31, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Signature

Could I persuade you to use a more conventional signature? You signature in the section above sounds like this to someone using a screen reader for the blind:

siNkarma eight six dash Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia Okie Dokie. Eight six equals one nine plus nine plus one four plus karma equals one nine plus nine plus one four plus talk two two colon three one comma six april two zero one three left paranthesis yoo tee cee right parenthesis.

This has a few problems. First of all, the clever two-line effect makes the "Okie Dokie." come out below the "siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia". Second, your use of numbers, " " and "=" makes it hard for blind persons to read. Besides being annoyingly long, normally someone using a screen reader hits the "go to the next sentence" key as soon as the see the pattern "name number number colon", knowing that the rest is a normal Wikipedia signature. All those numbers make it hard to tell when the name ends the time begins.

Might I suggest something like this?

(Start of example signature)

Okie Dokie. --siNkarma86: Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 00:00, 1 January 2001 (UTC)[reply]

(End of example signature)

--Guy Macon (talk) 21:51, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ecological fallacy

Hi, regarding this edit to Lie detection, could you please elucidate the ecological fallacy's relevance to lie detection? --Chealer (talk) 03:16, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ruggero Santilli

I have reverted your restoration of a 'sanitised' version of the IP's antisemitic rant at Talk:Ruggero Santilli. It isn't our job to rewrite material which per WP:NOTFORUM has no legitimate reason to be on a talk page in the first place - and you should note that the IP has already been blocked for posting it. Furthermore, we don't even know if it is Santilli, and allowing such inflammatory material to be posted in his name without verification could well violate WP:BLP policy. I cannot see any possible benefit in encouraging further such behaviour, regardless of who is responsible for the posting. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:09, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:All-raelian.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clone Maker.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Clone Maker.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 19:47, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heat page. Is heat only something transferred?

Hi, I saw your comment on heat on the heat page.

>>Heat is the thing being transferred. Heat is the quantity of thermal energy responsible for the change of thermal energy of an object. You can think of "heat flow" as the transfer of the transferred entity "heat". So in the context of classical thermodynamics the term "heat flow" is a redundant way of saying "heat".

For some strange reason many modern textbooks are in denial about the classical meaning of heat as described by Kelvin Planck and co. As far as i can see this came about because of the influence of one particular text book writer in America.

Planck treatise on heat was published with its 22nd edition in 1964 with the text clearly saying heat was something in matter.

Wiki for some really strange reason totally refuses to allow the classical view to be correctly described and refuses to allow any explanation as to why the change to the modern version used by some text books is the only allowable version of reality.

I spent months on this a few years back. All of my labouriously created edits to show the classical view of heat were instaneously removed by one editor after i had worked enormously hard to get my changes past other editors who had earlier insisted i was wrong. It is just too weird that something as simple as heat cannot be described on wiki. I am by the way banned on wiki and dont want to get involved again and find i am just wasting my life on these topics.

One thing is for sure these heat discussions will continue forever if Wiki refuses to allow the classical view of heat to be correctly described and refuses to show why the change was made to the current version that wiki insists is the only allowed version. I cannot understand it. Why would anybody behave like this??

Thanks for listening!

Regards Andrew — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.187.21 (talk) 09:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My sentiments exactly.siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia
^{86 = 19 9 14 karma = 19 9 14 talk} 03:10, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BlackLight Power

That is quite a job list. Fuel cell technician? For plasma reactors? I wonder how many of the applicants have viewed BLP on WP. Any of them swayed? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 20:17, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

interesting fact - no media relations specialist. telling. Ronnotel (talk) 20:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Your recent editing history at BlackLight Power shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Bishonen | talk 03:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BlackLight Power is under discretionary sanctions

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to pseudoscience and fringe science. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you inappropriately edit pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

Bishonen | talk 04:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Signature length

Please review WP:SIGLEN as your signature is 625 characters of wikitext:

<span style="display:inline-block; margin-bottom:-0.3em; vertical-align:-0.4em; line-height:1.2em;  font-size:{{#ifeq:|f|85%|85%}}; text-align:right;"><!--
  -->'''[[User:Kmarinas86|siNkarma86]]'''—Expert ''Sectioneer'' of Wikipedia<br /><!--
  --><sup>''86'' = ''19 9 14   karma = 19 9 14   [[User talk:Kmarinas86|talk]]''</sup></span>

Johnuniq (talk) 22:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Warning regarding your edits at Talk:BlackLight Power

Kmarinas86, regarding your edits at Talk:BlackLight Power, including this recent one: This is another notice that the article is under WP:ARBPS, and a warning that article Talk pages are to be used to only to discuss improvements to the article, based in reliable sources and Wikipedia content rules. Your comment I linked consisted almost entirely of your unsourced personal theories and speculation about how the company operates; the only phrase that would be clearly acceptable under WP:TPG was "we can't add it to the article yet per Wikipedia WP:RS". Further misuses of the article Talk page will result in sanctions. Thank you. Zad68 02:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Sheriff.^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 05:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New wikia page

In case you were unaware, I thought you might be interested in this new site at Wikia. Ronnotel (talk) 12:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Zeitgeist Movement globe.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Zeitgeist Movement globe.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:48, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Yes to Human Cloning.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Yes to Human Cloning.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:23, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Zeitgeist Movement globe.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Zeitgeist Movement globe.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 05:01, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Raëlian Winter Seminar -February 2000- in Toulon France.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Raëlian Winter Seminar -February 2000- in Toulon France.jpg, which you've attributed to http://raelian.com/gallery/view_photo.php?set_albumName=raelian&id=raelian_200002. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

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 to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} 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. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —innotata 19:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Raëlian Winter Seminar -February 2000- in Toulon France.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Raëlian Winter Seminar -February 2000- in Toulon France.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

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 to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} 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. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:25, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Genesis Raëlian.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Genesis Raëlian.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 23:45, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Blacklight Power.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Blacklight Power.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Honorary Guides of the Raëlian Movement.gif listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Honorary Guides of the Raëlian Movement.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:14, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Honorary Guides of the Raëlian Movement.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Honorary Guides of the Raëlian Movement.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kmarinas86. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

Calling another editor a "bot" can be construed as a personal attack. Please see wp:NPA Jim1138 (talk) 22:40, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring notice

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Brilliant Light Power. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 22:40, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think you started it. Bot.^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 22:56, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Kmarinas86. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Sensual Meditation Raelian.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Sensual Meditation Raelian.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Kmarinas86. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Please refrain from using talk pages such as String transport for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. –dlthewave ☎ 17:30, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Regarding your comments and changes to the STRING TRANSPORT page. I've looked at your page and you seem to be a well-recognized Wikipedia contributor on complex matters relating to science. Although I haven't been able to work out any of the actual changes you made you, I'm just hoping you're not connected to the scam. I did see that you mentioned the scam in one of your comments and because you've made observations about the science aspects of this page, I'd really appreciate it if you could include actual references to the validity of the science backing up the STRING TRANSPORT itself as opposed to the dangerous scams which seem inextricably linked to the justification of its funding. It would be great if you could find real scientific references that distance the science of the engineer Yunitsky from the scammers who abuse it because I can't find any sources to justify it myself. If I don't get backup from informed users then the scammers will just change it back again. I can find pages and pages of pseudo-scientific justification or self-referential pages referring to how much money you could make from this scheme but a complete lack of distance between the science and the scam. But if there are real sources which could justify in any real way a distinction between the scammers and the science, this could be made clear in the article structure. The science has to be clearly distinguished from the financial scam with just and real contextualization of the science so that it is not confused with the investment scam. And if they are as connected as I fear - meaning Yunitsky himself is at best indifferent to the abuse of his ideas and at worse profiting from it, then the scientific references need to be either removed or referenced as ONLY the justification for a scam. I know this is asking a lot of you but I'd really appreciate some feedback from an informed source. As far as I can see the engineer has made no observable effort to distance his theory from the criminal scamming. If the scientific information is included it has to be clearly opposed and distinguished so that real readers who get roped in are not duped by the science, whether or not it actually exists. I look forward to your advice and help. The matter is urgent; I know personally people who have lost a lot of money. I found it suspect because it seemed extremely illogical for everyday individuals to provide money to a large-scale public transportation system. Nonetheless they became convinced to hand over large sums of money with the promise of real returns from investment of their hard-earned income in tax-free investments in what they are told is an eco-friendly transportation system. And this is thanks to sources like the Wikipedia article which contains scientific information with references that are both cyclical and self-referential. For non-English speakers this could be extremely misleading even if the reference to the scam is included. Scammers seem to e even changing this language so it sounds less threatening and critical. I look forward to your reply and thanks on the beforehand for your attention. Kind regards, Zachar Laskewicz.Zachar Alexander Laskewicz 14:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)Zaxander. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaxander (talk • contribs)

Thank you for brining your concerns to my attention. As an English-only reader, It is not all straight forward to read all the relevant independent analysis about the feasibility of String Transport. However, on Yunitskiy's personal website, you can explore the items under "Expert Opinion" (http://www.yunitskiy.com/author/press_expert.htm) (English highlighted in yellow):

2017	Conclusion / Russian University of Transport (MIIT). - Moscow, December 11, 2017 - 4 p.
	Conclusive statement / Russian University of Transport. - Moscow, 11 December 2017. - 2 p.
	The conclusion of the state examination number 302-70 / 17D / State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus. - Minsk, March 9, 2017 - 2 p.
	The conclusion of the state examination number 2532-70 / 16 / State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus. - Minsk, February 15, 2017 - 39 p.
2016	The conclusion of the state examination number 1073-70 / 16 / State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus. - Minsk, June 28, 2016 - 13 p.
	The conclusion of the state examination number 1056-70 / 16D / State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus. - Minsk, June 10, 2016 - 3 p.
	The conclusion of the state examination number 819-70 / 16 / State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus. - Minsk, May 31, 2016 - 14 p.
	On Innovative Technologies Approved by the Expert Council on Improving the Innovation of State Smokes at the Ministry of Transport of Russia / Minutes of the meeting of the Working Group on Improving the Innovation of Government Procurement in the Transport Complex chaired by the Deputy Minister of Transport of the Russian Federation - Head of the Working Group A.S. Tsydenova. - Moscow, March 25, 2016 - p. 7-8.
	On consideration of the application of CJSC "String Technologies" / Minutes of the meeting of the Expert Council of the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation to increase the innovation of public procurement in the transport complex. - Moscow, February 11, 2016 - 7 p.
2013	Report No. O-905 on the valuation of the market value of exclusive rights to intellectual property and know-how of the "String-rail transport system of the engineer Yunitsky" / Auditing company "Hold-Invest-Audit". - Moscow, May 22, 2013 - 158 p.
2013	Report № O-905 on market value assessment of exclusive intellectual property and know-how rights on the "String-and-rail transportation system of engineer Yunitskiy" / Consulting company "Hold-Invest-Audit". - Moscow, 22 May 2013. - 161 p.
2012	Conclusion No. 031-И-12 on the market valuation of the exclusive right to know-how on Unitsky string technologies necessary for the implementation of the Freight Transport System project The Chiquitos (Bolivia) iron ore deposit - the Atlantic coast of São Paulo (Brazil), including offshore Platform for transshipment of ore "/ Independent examination of the XXI century. - Moscow, March 16, 2012 - 2 p.
	Conclusion No. 018-И-12 on the market valuation of exclusive rights to know-how on Unitsky string technologies necessary for the implementation of the project "Australian Radial-Ring Network of High-Speed String Roads" Brisbane - Sydney - Melbourne - Adelaide - Perth - Darwin - Brisbane ( "Darwin - Port Augusta"; "Brisbane - Port Headland") with a total length of 17600 km "/ Independent examination of the XXI century. - Moscow, February 27, 2012 - 3 p.
	Conclusion № 018-I-12 about estimation of the market value of the exclusive right to the know-how in String Technology of Yunitskiy, required for the project "The Australian radial-ring network of high-speed string railways "Brisbane - Sydney - Melbourne - Adelaide - Perth - Darwin - Brisbane ("Darwin - Port Augusta", "Brisbane - Port Hedland") with the total length of 17,600 km" / Independent Expertise XXI century. - Moscow, 27 February 2012. - 3 p.
2011	Conclusion No. 176-И-11 on the assessment of the market value of the exclusive rights to know-how required for the construction of the Eurasian transport network using Yunitsky string technologies Almaty-Kaliningrad with a length of 7900 km / Independent Expertise XXI century - Moscow, December 27, 2011 - 3 p.
2010	String Transport Systems Technology / ProMet Engineers Pty Ltd. - Perth, 7 September 2010. - 6 p.
	Executive Summary of Innovative Transport Technology "String Transport Unitsky" / Institute of Transportation Problems named after N.S.Solomenko RAS. - St. Petersburg, 24 May 2010. - 13 p.
	Conclusion No. 073-И-10 on the market value of the exclusive right to know-how "Unitsky's string technologies at the start-up stage" / Independent Expertise XXI century - Moscow, May 20, 2010 - 2 p.
	Conclusion No. 073-I-10 Estimation of the market value of the exclusive right to the know-how "String Technologies of Unitsky at the start-up stage" / Independent Expertise 21^st^ Century. - Moscow, 20 May 2010. - 2 p.
2009	Yunitsky A.E. Examination and conclusions to the "String Transport Unitsky" / Brochure. - Moscow, October 20, 2009 - 3 p.
	Conclusion on the innovative transport technology "String Transport Unitsky" / Institute of Transport Problems RAS named after N.S. Solomenko. - St. Petersburg, October 5, 2009 - 20 p.
	Conclusion No. 162-I-09 on the assessment of the market value of the exclusive right to know-how Project "Center for the sale of string technologies" / Independent Expertise XXI century. - Moscow, September 17, 2009 - 2 p.
2008	Conclusion No. 226-И-08 on the cost of the exclusive right to know-how “Project of the Unitsky Stream Transport Land Demonstration and Demonstration Site” / Independent Expertise XXI century. - Moscow, December 8, 2008 - 2 p.
	Conclusion No. 187-И-08 on the market value of the exclusive right to know-how "Technology and Development" Unitsky String Transport "for the territory of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra" / Independent Expertise XXI century. - Moscow, October 7, 2008 - 2 p.
	Conclusion on the concept of "General transport strategy for the use and creation of Unitsky string transport routes (STU) in the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra", developed by Unitsky String Transport LLC / Institute of Transport Problems of the RAS Solomenko. - St. Petersburg, August 29, 2008 - 24 p.
2003	Conclusion / Moscow Institute of Materials and Effective Technologies. - Moscow, April 24, 2003 - 3 p.
2002	Expert evaluation of the investment value of intellectual property in the form of a patent for the invention of Ukraine No. 28057 "Linear transport system" / United Consulting company. - Kiev, December 1, 2002 - 4 p.
2002	Development of cargo and passenger transportation technologies , prospects for the development and implementation of string transport systems (JTS) developed by NPK Yunitsky OJSC off-street transport. - City of Ozyory, Moscow region, April 12, 2002 - 3 p.
2001	Expert opinion on the first phase of the Center for Human Settlements (Habitat) Project No. FS-RUS-98-S01 "Sustainable development of human settlements and improvement of their communication infrastructure using a string transport system (CTC)" / Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Transport. - Novosibirsk, October 19, 2001 - 2 p.
	Conclusion on the proposals of the regional public Fund "Unitran" to promote the development of the linear transport system (ITS) on the possibility of using ITS for the development of the Krasnoyarsk Territory. - Krasnoyarsk, January 31, 2001 - 4 p.
	Expert opinion on the possibilities of using the string transport system (ITS) in the suburban-urban transport of passengers and goods / Department of Urban Planning of the Moscow Architectural Institute. - Moscow, January 22, 2001 - 6 p.
	Conclusion on the technical soundness of the Unitsky String Transport System (STS) project / Management of Mechanized Technologies, Equipment and Leasing of Gosstroy of Russia. - Moscow, January 19, 2001 - 5 p.
2000	Expert opinion on the investment value of intellectual property "Unitsky Communication System" / Professional Assessment Center. - Moscow, April 25, 2000 - 3 p.
1997	On the technical proposal "String High-Speed Transport Mainline" / Report Note No. 09 / 801-42 to President of the Republic of Belarus Lukashenko A.G. - Minsk, January 14, 1997 - 4 p.
1996	String transport system / Minutes of the meeting of the Commission of the Academic Council of St. Petersburg State University of Communications. - St. Petersburg, March 20, 1996 - 4 p.
1987	Review of the work of Unitsky A.E. "Geocosmic Ring Transport System" / Institute of Mechanics of Metal-Polymer Systems of the Academy of Sciences of the BSSR. - Gomel, February 18, 1987 - 2 p.
	Feedback on the projects "Freight version of a planetary vehicle" (OTS) and "Geospatial ring transport system" (GKTS) of the author Unitsky A.E. / Institute of Mechanics of Metal-Polymer Systems of the Academy of Sciences of the BSSR. - Gomel, February 18, 1987 - 2 p.
	Feedback on the project of the transport system A.E. Unitsky / Institute of Mechanics of Metal-Polymer Systems of the Academy of Sciences of the BSSR. - Gomel, February 4, 1987 - 2 p.
1986	Conclusion on the proposal for a geocosmic ring transport system / USSR Cosmonautics Federation. - Moscow, December 17, 1986 - 1 p.

Here are some of Anatoly's monographs (http://www.yunitskiy.com/author/press_monograph.htm) (English highlighted in yellow):

2017	Yunitsky A.E. String transport systems: on Earth and in space / Monograph. - Minsk: Belarusian Nauka, July 20, 2017 - 379 p. - ISBN 978-985-08-2162-1.
2016	Yunitsky A.E. SkyWay transport complex in questions and answers. 100 questions - 100 answers / Monograph. The ninth edition, supplemented and revised. - Minsk, April 28, 2016 - 84 p.
2016	Anatoly Yunitskiy. Transport Complex SkyWay in Questions and Answers. 100 Questions - 100 Answers / Monograph. Ninth edition, added and re-worked. - Minsk, 28 April 2016. - 74 p.
2012	Yunitsky A.E. Unitsky transport system (SST) in questions and answers . 100 questions - 100 answers / Monograph. The eighth edition, supplemented and revised. - Moscow, May 25, 2012 - 80 p.
2010	Anatoly Yunitskiy. Technical specifications of freight string transport system for highly efficient transportation of bulk commodities / Monograph. - Sydney, 18 August 2010. - 132 p.
2010	Yunitsky A.E. Technical proposal for Unitsky cargo string transport for Australian conditions / Monograph. - Moscow, June 9, 2010 - 133 p.
2009	Yunitsky A.E. String transport Unitsky in questions and answers . 107 questions - 107 answers on STU / Monograph. Seventh edition, supplemented and revised. - Moscow, July 12, 2009 - 91 p.
2008	Yunitsky A.E. and others. New technologies in the creation and development of transport systems: a monograph. - Khanty-Mansiysk: Printers, December 1, 2008 - 238 p. Chapter 1. Basics of innovative development of transport systems Chapter 2. Innovations in solving problems of the development of transport systems of Siberia Chapter 3. Strategy for the creation of an overground transport system in the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra Chapter 4. Economic efficiency of the creation of UST routes in Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug-Ugra Chapter 5. Ensuring the economic reliability of the development and functioning of transport systems Chapter 6. Development and operation of production and transport systems based on the integration interaction of their subjects List of used sources and applications
2006	Anatoly Yunitskiy. String Transport Unitsky in questions and answers / Monograph. Sixth edition, added and re-worked. - Moscow, 29 November 2006. - 60 p.
2006	Yunitsky A.E. Features of the design of high-rise string transport system monoSTU , combined with high-rise buildings / Monograph. - Moscow, August 1, 2006 - 52 p.
2004	Yunitsky A.E. Ensuring sustainable development of human settlements and protecting the urban environment using the string transport system / Project Report of the United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-HABITAT) No. FS-RUS-02-S03. - M .: Federal Agency for Construction and Housing and Communal Services (Gosstroy of Russia), April 22, 2004 - 158 p.
2004	Yunitsky A.E. String transport systems - new technologies in land transport / Monograph. - Moscow, March 17, 2004 - 55 p.
2000	Yunitsky A.E. Sustainable development of human settlements and improvement of their communication infrastructure using a string transport system. The final report on the project of the UN Center for Human Settlements No. FS-RUS-98-S01 / Monograph. - Moscow: Gosstroy of Russia, September 15, 2000 - 179 p.
	Anatoly Yunitskiy. Sustainable development of human settlements and improvement of their communication infrastructure through the use of a String Transportation System. Final report on the UN Centre for Human Settlements project FS-RUS-98-S01 / Monograph. - Moscow: Gosstroy of Russia, 15 September 2000. - 160 p.
	Yunitsky A.E. String transport system in questions, answers and projects / Monograph. The fifth edition, supplemented and revised. - Moscow, August 14, 2000 - 75 p.
	Anatoly Yunitskiy. String Transportation System (STS) in questions, answers and projects / Monograph. Fifth edition, added and re-worked. - Moscow, 14 August 2000. - 99 p.
1999	Yunitsky A.E. STS-program in questions, answers and documents / Monograph. Fourth edition, supplemented and revised. - Moscow, August 9, 1999 - 94 p.
1999	Yunitsky A.E. STS-program in questions, answers and documents / Monograph. Third edition, supplemented and revised. - Moscow, January 21, 1999 - 87 p.
1998	Yunitsky A.E. STS-program in questions, answers and documents / Monograph. Second edition, supplemented and revised. - Moscow, April 8, 1998 - 74 p.
1997	Yunitsky A.E. STS-program in questions, answers and documents / Monograph. - Gomel-Moscow, December 25, 1997 - 61 p.
1995	Yunitsky A.E. String transport systems: on Earth and in space. - Gomel: Infotribo, December 1, 1995 - 337 pp., Ill. Part 1. String transport system (ITS) Chapter 1. The general concept of the JTS, as an alternative to existing types of transport Chapter 2. Design features of the JTS Chapter 3. Tasks of high-speed transport mechanics[3] Chapter 4. Dynamic Model and Estimated Estimation of the Motion Parameters of Transport Modules along a String Transport Line Part 2. Planetary Vehicle (OTC) Introduction Chapter 1. Dynamics of the OTS in the outer space in the equatorial plane of the Earth Chapter 2. The dynamics of the launch of an OTN into orbit with energy dissipation due to the rise of the shell Chapter 3. Maneuvering the rotor in order to circumvent objects moving in the equatorial plane Chapter 4. The problems of creating an accelerator for accelerating an OTS rotor Chapter 5. Estimation of the parameters of the process of aerodynamic heating of the rotor of the OTS in the absence of a protective sheath
1990	Yunitsky A.E. The program "Ecomir" / Academy of New Thinking, Institute of social and scientific and technical innovations "Unitran". - Moscow, August 1, 1990 - 93 p.
1988	Yunitsky A.E. The program "Ecomir" / Soviet Peace Foundation, Center "Star World". - Gomel, August 23, 1988 - 82 p.
	Anatoly Yunitskiy. Ecoterra Program / Soviet Peace Foundation, "Star World" Center. - Gomel, 23 August 1988. - 32 p.
	Anatoly Yunitskiy. The program "Ecoterra" / Soviet Foundation for Peace, Center "World of Stars". - Gomel, August 23, 1988. - 36 р.

Sincerely, ^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 01:06, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the most relevant patent written in English I could find that goes into great detail.

European Patent EP3395637A1: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/2e/e5/31/08178b67457ccc/EP3395637A1.pdf
Google Patents Page: https://patents.google.com/patent/EP3395637A1

Sincerely, ^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 01:39, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kmarinas86r: Thank you so much for the detailed information and all the references! There are so many. Fortunately I have a rudimentary knowledge of Russian and went to the particularly time consuming trouble of checking every last one. Here is an analysis of their usability to Wikipedia for any article concerning the engineer Yunitsky or his 'String transport' theory.

Unfortunately all the references to Yunitsky's work by Yunitsky himself are unusable because as you know Wikipedia cannot permit self-referencing. I looked at them anyway. They are very long and complex but they don't have any verifiable research I can check with other sources. The "Ecoterra" work, for example, is just an unpublished typed manuscript. "Ecomir" appears to be a thesis or unpublished manuscript. The 'String Theory on Earth and in Space' mostly concerns highly impractical use of this system in space. In "STS program" Yunitsky includes a list of literature with only his own writings. I could go on and describe the problems with each of these documents but seeing I can't use them anyway it would be a waste of both my time and yours.

As far as the other works are concerned: I can't use copies of contracts signed with anyone because they don't mean anything. The translation of the 'conclusive statement' which is unreferenced is obviously unusable. To repeat: I checked every last document, especially those in Russian.

They photocopies of the conclusions are from an unreferenced book. Furthermore, unpublished documents on the market value of something are nothing but misleading and are in case unusable because they have no scientific value. Obviously all applications for any type of funding is for good reasons self-promoting and are therefore meaningless and unusable. Similarly, copies of letters from anywhere in the world (even Perth, Australia) have absolutely no scientific validity in themselves. The stamped copies of academic conclusions are also unusable because they're unpublished sources. Protocols and proposals of any type are self-promoting and are unusable. Stamped documents and contracts are similarly of absolutely no academic value. Any documentation on something's 'investment value' are obviously unusable but completely irrelevant anyway. Minutes of meetings are obviously completely worthless in any academic sense. Reviews of works relating to the "geocosmic" application are unrelated to the subject at hand; it wasn't worth me checking the academic references of these works. For this reason all of the works in the eighties are unfortunately meaningless.

As far as the registration of the patents are concerned. Anyone can apply for a patent. They don't mean anything in and of themselves.

If you could actually provided me with real published objective commentary from secondary sources then I'd have them translated in detail and analysed. It's a pity the works by Yunitsky can not be used. Otherwise there are contracts, lots of self-promotion, anecdotal letters and unpublished conclusions. The only thing that could be useful would be real academic journals who provide valid commentary. I've looked through every document in Russian, English and French. There is not a single source I can use.

Thank you however for the time you took to send me this stuff, and please don't hesitate to send me any real published works if and when they are ever brought out. I will analyse them and pass them on for academic assessment for future use in a Wikipedia article. As soon as you do, I'll include analysis is the talk page of any articles and this will eventually get summarized and included in the article. But no more unpublished documentation or anecdotal evidence will be tolerated in any language be it Russian, English or Swahili.

Wishing you the best and thanks again. Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 16:10, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SkyWay Group discussions

Thanks for your additions to the 'String transport' site. I'm just worried that you will start an edit war with another user. I've informed a group of users about the application you've made of unverifiable references to self-promoting sources. It will not turn out well. PLEASE stop referencing YouTube films and commons articles with no scientific references. If you want to include a new scientific argument you have to use a third-party source. PLEASE post this source on the talkpage for approval first. I really want there to be verifiable science to update this article in a useful way. But if you start a war with any of the users who remove this unverifiable self-promoting, self-referencing propaganda, I fear you will be banned again. We don't want that to happen as it won't help anyone. –Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 10:37, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for cleaning up the reference links to the Italian and Indian articles. Look, we want to learn about the construction/deconstruction of this technology in 2008 in Moscow and the more recent Belarus TechnoPark - and the accident. This is a potentially valid topic. In the talk page you can propose sections by making concise arguments with the use of references. Please keep information succinct and to the point with only links to the articles you propose are valid. The articles will be translated and assessed. But if you want to make changes to the actual article you'll have to have positive assessment from other users who can verify your sources as more than anecdotal or self-promoting. If your sources are valid you'll be able to reference them later without fear of having your improvements removed; consensus among users is the most important thing. But please don't bombard the talk page with information. One good reference is better than a thousand that don't mean anything. Wishing you the best –Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 12:58, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

-If you want to make dramatic changes to the structure of the page, please suggest it first on the talk page. Your queries will be listened to. I agree with changing the title to 'regulatory disputes'; it's clearer than 'financial irregularities'. But if you go and change the whole structure of the article you could easily give the impression that intentions are bad faith. You've given no justification for your changes as they are; and on a page whose contents is sensitive, changes can only be done with consensus. -Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 14:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kmarinas86:I see you've put a 'which' reference to the Yunitskiy sentence at the end of the first paragraph of the 'SkyWay Group' article. Another user Britishfinance (talk · contribs) advised me to reference the article that states clearly that 'Yunitskiy' is the founder and owner of the company first in the 'Background' section and then to include a summary of that in the opening paragraph. You can read our discussion of this topic on his talk page. I used the most recent 'Baltic Course' article from February 2019 which involves the court case against the Lithuanian government where Yunitskiy sued them for forcing him to move his project back to Belarus (he lost). Please remove this sentence if you think it's unverified and I'll try to find a better one. I am paying attention to your observations and trying to learn from them. –Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 17:00, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The main issue is that Yunitskiy is the founder of some of, but not all of, the SkyWay Group of Companies. This needs to be better specified.^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 17:06, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kmarinas86: I agree. Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the great photos!-Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 14:55, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome!^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 16:57, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It would be really great if you could move this discussion to a separate heading and list concisely the point you are trying to make about the SkyWay disclaimer notes and SkyWay policy. These points need to be made but it would be much more useful if they made sense. At present they are suddenly introduced to argue a deletion request. They are not very informative here because they don't appear to even address the issue of deletion being discussed. This content could be used, however, to influence the content of the article. This would be both useful and interesting. I encourage you to create a new heading specifically addressing this issue as the article is about the SkyWay companies and collecting valid verifiable references on this topic is important. But it has to be clear so other people can contribute to this topic as well.–Zachar Laskewicz (talk) 19:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be great if you created a new heading discussing U.N. funding of SkyWay or the concept of funding. If there is this 'Habitat Debate' reference to SkyWay and the U.N., there will undoubtedly be other ones as well that actually relate to either the grant that the U.N. gave to SkyWay or the supposed investment. Since it appears to be true there are certainly enough reasons to gather information about it as it could certainly influence the contents of the article. The Czech SkyWay article (which purports to be a translation of an older 'string transport' article in English) has a specific heading devoted to the subject of the funding of projects. It discusses the U.N. grant, the money Lebed supposedly invested and the creation of the RSW company to self-fund from small investors. Unfortunately it doesn't include any references. –Zachar (talk) 10:28, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry but I had to change the text you added to the article. It was only because the 'rolling stock' is not mentioned at all in the 'tut.by' article. It must be mentioned somewhere else - this is a standard phrase to describe this technology and it returns in all sorts of self-published SkyWay promotion. There must therefore also be verified articles which mention this aspect of the technology? If you have a new verified reference that contains information about the EcoFest 2018 event with this technical information, I'd love to see it but you can't change the article without referencing them first. You can check the contents of the article currently quoted in the talk page; English translations of all the Tut.by articles can be checked there. I just read it rhrough again and it doesn't mention the 'truss' system or include any of these extra technical details about the tracks. Please provide valid references before adding technical information to the article because it will only be removed by other users. Also, EcoTechnoPark has not been certified for testing; it is a self-funded demonstration facility that was rejected the Belarusian NSA. They also rejected two applications for official recognition of SkyWay as a scientific organization. Maybe we should rename this section as SkyWay is actually officially untested and uncertified. –Zachar (talk) 13:51, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"...which three tracks demonstrated passenger rolling stock: A rigid track made of a truss which was operating a vehicle with a maximum capacity of 48 people, as well as semi-rigid and flexible..." I'm currently checking to find references to the rolling stock, the rigid track with the truss and the semi-rigid track. It must be published somewhere; as soon as I find it in a verified reference I'll return this information to the text, if you haven't already provided the reference and changed it yourself. -Zachar (talk) 14:14, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

" Я быстро исследовал территорию парка. Всего здесь пока три трассы — одна для тяжелых транспортных юнибусов с максимальной вместимостью 48 человек, вторая, самая скоростная, — для 14-местных юнибусов («маршруток»), еще одна — самая высокая с прогибающимися пролетами — для 6-местных юникаров. " Please note that this is the text from the tut.by reference which says 6-seat and 14-seat vehicles, not passengers. Zachar (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well that is a shame because the 14-passenger unibus does not have 14 seats.^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 19:07, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you and I'll keep an eye out for verified references which mention this. I had to look really hard and translate lots of articles to find this information in a verified source. They are holding a new EcoFest in August 2019. The will undoubtedly permit journalists to attend who will publish updated information about the vehicles and the new tracks they have built since the last EcoFest in 2018. In the meantime, if we find new verified sources that comment on the veicles, we can always change the article. Maybe they displayed these particular 14 passenger vehicles at a trade fair and a verified source comments on now many seats. Was this the vehicle demonstrated at the InnoTrans in 2018? I'll keep looking. I checked through pages and pages of articles for the rolling stock information and I couldn't find anything. This is evidently important and I'd like you to know that it matters to me too that the article is accurate. I love the new photo but I changed the text of one of them because it had inaccurate information in it.

Did you manage to find anymore information on the United Nations involvement with with SkyWay? –Zachar (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rael

Raël, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 03:06, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:48-passenger double-rail unibus.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:48-passenger double-rail unibus.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:A Working Newman Machine Replica 3.jpg

The file File:A Working Newman Machine Replica 3.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused image

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 03:34, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Multiverse (religion) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Multiverse (religion) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Multiverse (religion) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Crossroads ^-talk- 04:31, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Heat as a transfer of energy" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Heat as a transfer of energy and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 1#Heat as a transfer of energy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:ArticleProgress

Template:ArticleProgress has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 05:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Human Cloning Raëlian.gif

The file File:Human Cloning Raëlian.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused personal file. Out of scope.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 05:28, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Human Cycle DNA.jpg

The file File:Human Cycle DNA.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused personal file. Out of scope.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 05:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]