User talk:DePiep/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Suez canal

Hi we talked somewhere about this, but I can't remember where ;-). About File:Suez canal english.jpg: I strongly think the dual-lane does not extend into the Small Bitter Lake. In the SCA maps [1], the lanes clearly flow together in the sound South end of the Great Bitter Lake. DePiep (talk). 1 septembre 2015 à 14:45 (CEST)

You are absolutely right. I had a closer look at the "official map" which is something I probably didn't do in the past well enough. I will change that little map. Regards.--Io Herodotus (talk) 20:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Great. It's a nice map. -DePiep (talk) 20:50, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I have changed the French version of it. Have a look at fr:Modèle:Carte/Canal de Suez. Telle me what you think. Perhaps I could create a {{Suez canal}}, but I can't find informations on how to do it. Regards.--Io Herodotus (talk) 08:39, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Io Herodotus: that's better. Maybe you could split the lanes more clearly. It looks like they even are joined near the former Ballah bypass. What would the template be? -DePiep (talk) 13:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The lanes actually join near the former Ballah bypass and further south (according toSCA maps). A template would be an interactive map with links on items, like this one.--Io Herodotus (talk) 16:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes the lanes are connected, but the main lines do not join. These connections are (a) leftover from earlier routes, such as the diversoire and the South end of the old Ballah bypass. And (b) there are new interconnections. All those interconnections are not part of the main shipping route, they are used for tugs and so. I think there is no need to show them on your map (given the scale). I made the schematic {{Suez Canal map}}, and I choose to not show those local connections. Your Rotterdam map is really great! A joy to see. Have a nice edit, DePiep (talk) 18:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you again. There is no need to create template:Suez canal, the file you have created "Suez canal map" is much better. I remember I tried to translate it, and when I looked at "edit" of that template....I got scared and I realised I couldn't do it and I don't know how you create such a difficult thing, perhaps you have the right tools for that. Something else, a while ago, I tried to create an English version of fr:Modèle:Carte/Plan Delta, but I don't know how to do it. Do you know any map that looks like that, I mean a map with links? Regards.--Io Herodotus (talk) 20:16, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Those scheme maps are horribly complicated (I also made {{Panama Canal map}}). They use WP:RDT (originally German-wiki railroad schemes, the core is "BS" = Bahnstrecke = a stretch of railroad). It uses multiple code layers like color, function (rail, road, canal), status (open, defunct, projected) all together. I did not use a tool. Also, there are editors seriously patrolling new elements & their names.

About Plan Delta: I do not know the text-link technique your fr map has. I do know the mouse-position-link technique (= link by mouse position on a graph). I had to ask what is is: Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Photography_workshop#Some_wiki_technique

(Missing wrong placement on that map: fr:Escaut oriental ;-) ) -DePiep (talk) 02:34, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

I believe you when you said those scheme maps are difficult, you must have a computer in your head. About the El Ferdan Railway Bridge, you removed "situation unclear". Did you get information about it ? Can the trains use it (to cross both lanes) ? Regards. (I have changed "Escaut oriental", actually it was't wrong, but it's better now)--Io Herodotus (talk) 19:49, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

I have no source that says the El Ferdan railway connection exists over the new Suez canal (second lane), there. So I kept it "not in function" in the legend, and in the scheme icons available. I only removed that text to clean up editorial. Supporting my distrust is that the rail connection does not look very important these days (into Sinai desert?), and that news/PR messages say that Egypt planned six new tunnels under the canal -- so why would they add a cumbersome bridge at El Fardan? These are just my impressions of course, but I really need a source that says what railway is functioning over there, new situation.

WP:RDT is horror & headache, esp with Suez and Panama are this complicated. So far, I did not meet errors in my schemes. For our encyclopedia, we'd prefer a more fluent way. But alas.

Now, about Anglicise your fr:Modèle:Carte/Plan Delta. Of course, the text should change from

{{G|Plan Delta|51.36|3.868|Escaut occidental|Lac|e}}

{{G|Plan Delta|51.36|3.868|Oosterschelde|Lac|e}} (en:Oosterschelde, they use the Dutch name). This is not the issue, we know.

Also, it requires template fr:Modèle:G to be available in English (on en:wiki). Maybe this week I'll take a good look at that, and build that. It looks like a great feature.

Just to note: I do have the paper Larousse 1989 here with me. Inspiring :-) Suez Canal pictures. -DePiep (talk) 21:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Larousse 1989, why do you said it's inspiring ? It's not so long ago. My mother must have a much older one. I'll have a look at it, the next time I visit her. I have changed fr:Modèle:Carte/Canal de Suez, if you think it's correct I will change the English version.

A paper encyclopedia, just like my first one (1973). Nice browsing. (Not very useful for new sourced statements in WP of course). -DePiep (talk) 22:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

"new Suez Canal" graphs

Split into about "new Suez canal" graphics only

• I repeat: [2]. -DePiep (talk) 11:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Delta Plan

I made a request there.--Io Herodotus (talk) 21:25, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

I think I have started something with Template:Delta Plan which has to be completed with the right symbols.--Io Herodotus (talk) 06:56, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I think it's finished now and I realize many articles have to be created !--Io Herodotus (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

--davinci here--

Appreciated. -DePiep (talk) 20:34, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Iron(II) sulfate may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• }}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:45, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Chembox parametercheck/doc

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 13:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

ChemBox fix weirdness

Thanks for fixing all these! This one went bad. Not sure what regexp pattern mis-fired. DMacks (talk) 14:52, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

My regex did not handle this inner template well: |SMILES_Ref={{smilescite|...|...}}. It's OK to revert such edits. -DePiep (talk) 09:43, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Chembox problem

Hi DePiep, I'm seeing a different appearance within articles about chemicals today and I'm wondering if maybe one of the recent changes you made to {{chembox}} or its associated subtemplates has something to do with it (or maybe it's some kind of issue with my browser). Only a small amount of article text is appearing directly to the left of the chembox. For example, in chloroform I see the introductory section at the top of the page with the chembox on the right, but the "Structure" section does not start until way down at the bottom of the chembox, leaving a huge whitespace. It is as if something akin to {{clear}} is now associated with the chembox template where it wasn't before. Any ideas? -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:29, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

I just looked at the Village pump and it seems to be a more widespread problem, not specific to the chembox: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Blank_spaces_left_when_second-level_headings_follow_floating_boxes. Sorry that I "blamed" you without looking around first.  :) -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:33, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

No blaming read, all the right to ask a well-written careful question. btw, I see no irregularity in the article. -DePiep (talk) 21:39, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Someone at the VP discussion linked above says, "I am only seeing this on Firefox, and not on IE on Windows", so it appears to be browser-specific. I'm using Firefox. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:42, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

They say its solved now. Anyway, out of my league. -DePiep (talk) 21:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Chembox lists

Hey, I know I originally raised this many months ago but I have finally finished working my way through this list. Several hundred pages have been added to WikiProject Chemistry's books. I was wondering if you could refresh the list so I can see if any new "lost" pages have appeared. --Project Osprey (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Nice to do, have put it on top of my list. Pls keep the talk here. I've refined the description of that list (the page's lede). Two questions:

1. No improvements needed? You are fine with the four wikiprojects mentioned?

2. Would you consider this. We also have {{drugbox}} (formally {{Infobox drug}}; 6217 transclusions). In real life, a lot of these are chemical substances with a medicine egde, more or less. They are usually in some medicine Wikiproject, OK. Now, it is a Wikipedia distinction (editors choice) to add {{Drugbox}} or {{Chembox}}. So I guess a lot/all of these pages belong in WP:CHEMICALS too. In other words, one could check with each of the {{Drugbox}} pages: "Why is this one not in some chemistry Wikiproject?".

For ease of working & thinking we should keep this list separate from the list we are talking about. What do you think? -DePiep (talk) 08:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Regarding 1: Current selection is good, no changes needed.

Regarding 2: I've been thinking the same thing. It probably does need to happen but it is a lot of work.

Thanks for doing this by the way. --Project Osprey (talk) 08:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

OK. {{Drugbox}} postponed indefinite. -DePiep (talk) 08:50, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Looks like you did a good cleaning job, Project Osprey. -DePiep (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Genetically modified organisms arbitration case opened

You may opt-out of future notification regarding this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 12, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC) on behalf of L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 20:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. -DePiep (talk) 21:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Gout

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Draft:Gout, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Gout. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 08:38, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 22 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Heilmann locomotive page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

dichromate

Please have a look at the chembox in dichromate. I could not get the first dichromate structure to resize. Many thanks. Petergans (talk) 11:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done. Played with the L:R ratio, wrong in editsummary. -DePiep (talk) 11:40, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

RfC at WP:NOT

If you want a wiki-tech challenge ("noprint" attributes in templates) plus a style-guideline challenge (dab page contents), please see the talk page at WP:NOT. I think you would like it, and hope you will will give your valued opinion. Thanks. — CpiralCpiral 21:25, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Season's Greetings and Happy New Year!

Wishing you a happy holiday season and a Merry Christmas. May your new year be happy and prosperous. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:04, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

New chembox

I welcome the fact that you are considering a new version of chembox. May I make a suggestion?

Consider using wikitable, with nested tables for each section. Using the wikitable would have the advantage that other editors will be able to help, because it is written in HTML which more of us can write. We can then contribute in the creation of the new box. At present you have to do everything yourself. Javascript inserts are usually allowed in HTML; I don't know if this is so in WP, but if they are this would provide additional flexibility.

I did something like this in Savitzky–Golay filter#Tables of selected convolution coefficients, putting tables side by side. Below is a skeleton chembox2 with a picture and two tables, one above the other. Replies on my userpage, please. Petergans (talk) 10:22, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

main title

Subtitle1	value
Property1	1234
Property2	1234
Subtitle 2 Property3 1234 Property4 1234

Petergans, today the Chembox is a table (coded in wikitable that is using pipes etc, but still)! And each section (Identifiers, Props) is a subtable. See for example {{Chembox Explosive}}. The change I have in mind (but not in my 2016 agenda) is to move to Lua script code. Managing all indexes and options (~500 params by now) is too cumbersome. -DePiep (talk) 10:33, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I have not been able to find the source code for chembox. Where is it?

I understand the complexity issue. My solution to this would be to put the subtables into separate modules and then deal with them one by one.

Incidentally, I strongly advise against Lua as it is not native to WP, not widely known and is written in C, which needs to be compiled. Java or Javascript are the natural successors to HTML, but also have the disadvantage of needing an interpreter/compiler to have been installed on the user's PC. Petergans (talk) 11:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Lua is accepted by Wikipedia -- it is the only script language available. It is used to draw boxes like {{Navbox}} ({{Navbox}} calles Lua script page module:Navbox). Complicated indeed, but with huge advantages.

{{Chembox}} code is in Category:Chembox templates - all 150+ subtemplates. And it is build as a wikitable (that produces HTML table code): {{Chembox}} is the outer table, one can enter section blocks like this:

{{Chembox
| Section1={{Infobox identifiers
| CASNo=123-45-7
 }}
}}

... and then the section calls sub-sub-template {{Chembox CASNo}} to build the single data row for the CAS RN. All using wikitable pipe symbols like | and |- and {| |}. The problem is that this is very unflexible. And cumbersome. When build in Lua, the template can call (#invoke) the Lua-module and process data more systematically. Already {{Infobox drug}} is in Lua. Anyway, won't happen this year. -DePiep (talk) 12:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this information. Here is another thought. As you probably know, I am concerned about the intrusive nature of the very large chemboxes. I would prefer if such boxes were put on "data" pages, leaving a much reduced box of essential items on the article page, with a link to "further data". Of course we will never reach a complete consensus as to what are the essential items, but it's worth considering. One big disadvantage of the large chemboxes is that one cannot put pictures on both the left and the right of a section of text where the chembox extends. If you agree, why not post your thoughts on the chemistry project page? Petergans (talk) 13:43, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Just some more of the same. Subtemplate {{Chembox CASNo|CASNo=123-45-7}} (with parameter input) produces this code:

You'll recognise this is a single wikitable row. This also says we must check the parameter before to have input, or else we'll show a blank row. Now this is what section-block Identifiers returns (header+datarows): {{Chembox Identifiers|CASNo=213-45-7}}

! colspan=2 style="background: #f8eaba; text-align: center;" |Identifiers

|-

|

CAS Number

|

• 213-45-7

|-

See, that is the Identifiers header in a wikitable (2-col wide, and with a background color).

Now all this is inside {{Chembox}}, which actually adds the opening and closing {| ... |} wikitable code.

Next: Lua script code is written in Module pages (namespace). For example, {{Infobox drug}} calls the Module:Infobox script that formats all infobox styles, and the template fills the infobox with data and labels (like CAS RN). No C coding/knowledge needed!

re reducing Chembox size: yes yes very much needed. We could put data into an article section (not separate page) named ==Data sheet== maybe. This is currently being discussed for {{Medical condition}} (ie, the disease infobox). See its talkpage, and demo page Draft:Gout. Take a look, you'll recognise some of the issues and options! -DePiep (talk) 17:21, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Source for atomic weights

Hello, at cswiki we have got a mess in atomic weights in articles about chemical elements. I noticed you handle the periodic table templates here. What source of atomic weights would you recommend? --Dvorapa (talk) 20:24, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Commission on Isotopic Abundances and Atomic Weights! (CIAAW, [3]), an IUPAC commission. They publish atomic weights, see http://www.ciaaw.org/atomic-weights.htm. That page should give you all.

We at enwiki try to use their values in all chemical element articles (infobox), and in List of elements, but I have not checked the numbers recently.

I have also used these values in template {{Chem molar mass}}. It is called like:

• {{Chem| H|2 |O| }} → 18.015 g·mol⁻¹

The formula is produced this way: {{Chem| H=2 |O=1 }} → H
₂O. See {{Chem molar mass}} /doc for explanation.

That /documentation also says about #Data_sources: 1. CIAAW provides three forms of atomic weight number. We at enwiki added a fourth form for synthetic atoms (just counting neuutrons + protons), because CIAAW does not mention them. So each element has one of four sources.

There are some issues with the template:

1. Does not add the precision: He = 4.002602(2), template: 4.002602 g·mol⁻¹

2. Calculating the total for a molecule (adding atomic weights) is performed very crude. Good maths say one must keep all precision numbers in mind (and produce a precision-range as outcome). This is not done in the template. It just adds and rounds (2 figs by default).

FYI: the template is used inside {{Drugbox}} and {{Chembox}} (16000 P), but can be overwritten by any editor on article page infobox.

Let me know if this or the /documentation is unclear. -DePiep (talk) 21:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response. I'll look at these templates soon and maybe convert/translate some of them for cswiki. Thank you for the links and explanations too. I'll surely let you know, if there would be any problem at all. --Dvorapa (talk) 21:40, 3 December 2015 (UTC)