User talk:Edgar181/Archive34

Username block

Dear Edgar, I did receive and respond to a message about violating Wikipedia's rules from Daniel Case. So, I am a little confused about why you blocked my user name (I would have deleted it, but didn't know how) and not sure why you are also contacting me. I had corrected a few details about our organization (like the exact organization name and the correct name of the Executive Director - Dr. William Schuster instead of Bill Schuster) and tried my best to be transparent that I represented the organization when I made those corrections (even if I was technically incorrect in using an organizational user name). I certainly regret the mistake and am very happy to work with the editors at Wikipedia to let them know about the very few errors in their article. Otherwise, we appreciate their interest in Black Rock Forest Consortium and their taking the time to write and research the Forest and Consortium.

I hope this clarifies the situation. Please let me know how to proceed and I will be happy to remedy the situation. Best, Brienne Cliadakis Communications Manager Black Rock Forest Consortium bcliadakis@hotmail.com 845.534.4517x11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcliadakis (talk • contribs) 17:22, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Assuming you are talking about User:Blackrockforestconsortium, I blocked this account merely because Wikipedia usernames are not permitted to match the names of organizations. Since you have already signed up with a different username, as you were encouraged to do, there isn't anything further that needs to be done related to the username. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Come Vote (again)

Hi. I am sorry to bother you, and I really hate having to stoop to this level. But since they did, so am I. They even told me to do it. So here I am (I don't know how to 'ping' someone).

I noticed that you took part in one of the numerous times that Side to Side was voted on or redirected. Well, a 3 day old voting decision isn't enough for them. They are back, and wanting a page and have a vote going on. They have Side to Side (song) running and a name change request was sent back to the talk page for a vote.

If you care to voice your opinion (again), feel free to click. Your previous decision does not count towards the current vote. This one is primarily about changing the name, but I feel that since it was currently voted to redirect, that the primary voting reason should be about whether to have a page or not. Either way, voices need to be heard (again).

Kellymoat (talk) 20:38, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Untitled

How dare you mind someon else's business that doesn't concern you and delete their page comments. It looks like you have more important things to worry about than playing wiki God. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robebassplayer (talk • contribs)

If you would like me to explain something I have done here, you are going to have to actually let me know what you are referring to. -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

CAS numbers for enantiomers of 4-methylthioamphetamine

Hi,

How are you? by me, all is good but the unknow CAS numbers ^^ - today it's for 4-Methylthioamphetamine and the related page fr:C10H15NS :

• 4-méthylthioamphétamine, numéro CAS 14116-06-4 , racémique
  • (R)-4-méthylthioamphétamine, numéro CAS 1030831-15-2
  • (S)-4-méthylthioamphétamine, numéro CAS 943816-61-3

Thank for you help --Titou (talk) 12:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad to help. The CAS number for the (S)-enantiomer is 943816-61-3. The CAS number for the (R)-enantiomer is 1030831-15-2. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:18, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Cheer! Super comme d'hab! = Genial! brilliant as usual ^^ - Merci bcp !! Thanks a lot!!

About this, I have another questions, one not linked with C10H15NS but CAS number, as ever^^. On the page fr:C5H12O, only one CAS number is missing, this one of the enantiomer (R)-methyl 1-methylpropyl ether (racemic methyl 1-methylpropyl ether CAS#6795-87-5 ). Please, could you find it ? Also for all other enantiomers, this page contains too +/– optical rotation descriptors, could you find it for the methyl 1-methylpropyl ether enantiomers? Apropos, could you find it too for those of 4-Methylthioamphetamine ?? Regards --Titou (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

@The Titou: Below are the CAS numbers. For 4-methylthioamphetamine there are four separate numbers for R, S, +, and -. My understanding is that this indicates the optical rotation has not yet been correlated with absolute stereochemistry. If ever that determination is made, the extra CAS numbers will be deprecated and merged. Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

(R)-(-)-methyl 1-methylpropyl ether: 66610-40-0

(S)-(+)-methyl 1-methylpropyl ether: 66610-39-7

(-)-4-Methylthioamphetamine: 756816-57-6

(+)-4-Methylthioamphetamine: 765898-09-7

thank you very much ! it's perfect for explanation. See you soon --Titou (talk) 06:23, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Wanna work? :P

Hey Edgar,

If you have nothing to do I have a bit of work for you. There are 2 articles that should be created, Ethyl Furoate and Megastigmatrienone. They are both very common additives in cigarettes, so there are many internet articles on them (they aren't just random chemicals). Also, I've created some chemical articles recently, and I have 0 chemistry education, so you could check them if you wish (they're on my user page). No pressure :) Ethanbas (talk) 21:03, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I'd be happy to take a look at the articles you've created. I'll look into creating articles for ethyl furoate and megastigmatrienone too. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Phone number spam

Thanks for blocking 103.234.136.227 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). 75.177.25.25 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) re-added the same number to Avast Software, but geolocates to somewhere else. — Sam Sailor 21:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I have now blocked the other IP too. Thanks for letting me know. (I changed the section header so as not to continue promoting the number) -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Compound articles

Hi, I noticed that you added notability tag on Thiobenzoic acid. I thought that articles about chemical compounds are inherently notable like articles about animals or geographic locations. Is there any notability guideline specifically for chemicals? I tried to find it but all I found was some AFDs of chemical articles. Thanks Fuortu (talk) 15:38, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Chemical compounds are not considered inherently notable. There isn't a specific notability guideline for chemicals, but they should meet the general notability guideline to be included in Wikipedia (as noted at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Chemistry). -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:49, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Sodium

Hi , I am trying to make Sodium a good article. Do you think it is ready for a GA review? I think almost everything is well sourced. If it is not ready, what should we do to make it ready? Thanks Fuortu (talk) 15:00, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

I have never had an interest in the GA review process, so I can't evaluate whether it's ready or not. The article looks well written and well sourced to me. If you nominate it for GA and need help with any feedback you get, I'll see if I can help. -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:04, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I'll nominate it now. Thank you :) Fuortu (talk) 22:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

American Nazi Party

User: Edgar181 you might want to Revdel the next edit summary, too. While you are at it. 15:33, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, it's done now. I shouldn't have missed that. Thanks for noticing and letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Ethyl benzene and xylene

are Ethyl BEnzene and Xylene are isomers? whether they can be termed as isomers of same organic compounds or different? What are the difference between Ethyl benzene and dimethyl benzene (xylene) except their structure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.177.78.225 (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure exactly what you are asking. Ethyl benzene and xylene are structural isomers. They are different chemical compounds that have the same chemical formula, but have a different arrangement of atoms. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Undelete

Hi. A few years ago I had my userpage speedy deleted, on my own request. I regret that now. I had an 'article' there (using all the insults vandals had sent me as refs), and I'd like to revive that. Is undeletion possible? Thanks. Yintan  12:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

It shouldn't be an issue. What's the userpage name? -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Yintan. Yintan  12:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

OK, I wasn't sure if it was a subpage. All the deleted revisions of User:Yintan are now visible again in the page history. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:49, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Yintan  12:57, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

User:TOP VELOCITY TRAVELS

You may wish to revoke talk page access as well.--Cahk (talk) 20:10, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Commons.wikimedia

Hello Edgar181. Bots (valid minerals without pictures) need the category:minerals on commons.wikimedia. Please, do not delete the category:minerals for valid minerals (categories) after the up to date IMA-CNMNC Master List of Valid Minerals. Ra'ike administrates these category, sometimes I help. Thank you very much. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

There is a template on that category that says, "This is a main category requiring frequent diffusion and maybe maintenance. As many pictures and media files as possible should be moved into appropriate subcategories." Moving items from category:minerals to its subcategories is what the reader is instructed to do. I don't understand your explanation of why following those instructions might be problem. Can you elaborate? -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Your "Native element minerals" category‎ (16 C). These 16 valid minerals (categories) should still be present in the "minerals" category. Thx. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 15:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Are you saying only that subcategories of w:commons:category:Native element minerals should be placed in both w:commons:category:Native element minerals and w:commons:category:minerals? That's fine with me, but perhaps some instructions explaining this should be included in the category descriptions. Other recategorizations I have done aren't a problem? -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok, exactly. I am the translator on behalf of Ra'ike. The subcategories of valid minerals on w:commons:category:minerals should stay there. Thx. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

(Stub administration needs w:commons:category:minerals, list of minerals (complete) and Wikidata:Wikidata:WikiProject Mineralogy/Mineral list#Sortable lists of Nickel-Strunz identifiers) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:18, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Cassandra Leah Quave

Hello, Edgar-

Regarding a previous deletion for the Wikipedia page for Cassandra Leah Quave, Ph.D.

About two years ago, my colleague Miranda had attempted to create a page for Dr. Quave, and it was deleted for reasons of notability at the time. Dr. Quave has since been featured in this story run by the New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/18/magazine/could-ancient-remedies-hold-the-answer-to-the-looming-antibiotics-crisis.html?smid=pl-share.

Is this sufficent to instate a page for Dr. Quave? In addition, I do have an updated CV document with updates.

Any advice/help on the matter is greatly appreciated.

Thanks so much,

Bonnie K. Weise — Preceding unsigned comment added by BonnieKWeise (talk • contribs) 15:19, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

My opinion is that would be sufficient. I have undeleted the previous draft article at Draft:Cassandra Leah Quave. You can update that draft, if you like, and then submit the article through the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Vani Hari

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Vani Hari. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Edgar181. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 24 September

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 Cypermethrin page, your edit caused a DOI 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) 00:20, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Still CAS numbers

Hi Egdar,

As I said yesterday or before yesterday, I need you for a determination of a CAS number if it exists! on fr:C6H12N2O2, it miss this one for N,N-diethyloxamide, I say really N,N-diethyloxamide (C₂H₅)₂NCOCONH₂, not N,N'-diethyloxamide CAS#615-84-9 .

Could you find it ? thank you in advance --Titou (talk) 16:15, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Also, perhaps easier for the enantiomers of 2-Methyl-2,4-pentanediol :

• 4R-(–)-2-methylpentane-2,4-diol, numéro CAS ?
• 4S-(+)-2-methylpentane-2,4-diol, numéro CAS ?

Please find it them --Titou (talk) 06:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@The Titou: Here are the CAS numbers. Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

N,N-diethyloxamide: 74332-61-9

(4R)-2-methylpentane-2,4-diol: 99210-90-9

(4S)-2-methylpentane-2,4-diol: 99210-91-0

Fabulous ! thank you very much ! merci beaucoup!

Why stop it now , on a so good road (en si bon chemin)

on fr:C4H10O2 it miss some things :

1- CAS numbers and optical rotation descriptors for the enantiomers of butane-1,2-diol ?

2- optical rotation descriptors for the pair of enantiomers (2R,3R)-butane-2,3-diol and (2S,3S)-butane-2,3-diol? if you could find it!

--Titou (talk) 18:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Here they are. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

(R)-(+)-1,​2-butanediol: 40348-66-1

(S)-(-)-1,​2-butanediol: 73522-17-5

(2S,​3S)​-(+)-2,​3-​butanediol: 19132-06-0

(2R,​3R)​-(-)-2,​3-​butanediol: 24347-58-8

(2R,​3S)​-​rel-2,​3-​butanediol: 5341-95-7 (1029272-42-1 appears to be a deprecated number for the same compound)

You are so likeable! Thanks a lot for all those data and explanations - write you again !^^ --Titou (talk) 08:07, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Orgo

Hey I've updated the call for pKa clarification. Maybe you can help, maybe you cannot; but, please dear God don't tell me you are one of those pKa_water is 15.7 folks! >_< (#feelsbadman) Adwctamia (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I think pKa for nitromethane of ~10 in water and ~17 in DMSO is what various sources confirm. I copied your data/reference from nitromethane to nitro compound. Both articles should be consistent and referenced now. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Ed, sorry about wiping out your edit on nitromethane. I was in the middle of a giant reorganization interupted by dinner... I will go back and try to repair this evening. --Smokefoot (talk) 01:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

No worries. Don't let my edit stand in your way. -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:41, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Collective confusion

Hi Sir, You are deleted my contribution here . I think you made a mistake and your source of information is distorted. I think is a collective mistake was widespread on many websites, and mixed in different languages to become this: 6-Piperidin-1-ylpyrimidine-2,4-diamine 3-oxide. The truth name is this: 6-(1-Piperidinyl)-2,4-pyrimidinediamine 3-oxide; 6-(1-Piperidinyl)pyrimidine-2,4-diamine 3-oxide; 2,4-pyrimidinediamine,6-(1-piperidinyl)-, 3-oxide (mw=209.25). You can verify here : , , , . Cordially.

Using systematic nomenclature, it is possible to obtain more than one valid chemical name. All four of the other names that you have listed above are valid. However, the one that you added to the article, "6-Piperidinyl-1-pyrimidine-2,4-diamine 3-oxide", is ambiguous and invalid. A single chemical structure cannot derived from that name. That is why I reverted your change. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

References

Hello Sir. Thank you for your reply. I had not noticed the ambiguity with the rest of the formula when I changed "Pyrimidin" to "Pyrimidinyl" I apologize. However, can I change "6-Piperidin-1-ylpyrimidine-2,4-diamine" to "6-(1-Piperidinyl)pyrimidine-2,4-diamine 3-oxide" and also add other names "6-(1-Piperidinyl)-2,4-pyrimidinediamine 3-oxide" , "2,4-pyrimidinediamine,6-(1-piperidinyl)-, 3-oxide" and include references? Cordially.-- Nico977 (talk) 17:33, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I have no objection to those changes. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:36, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

1,6-diiodohexane

Hi,

I found for the page fr:1,6-Diiodohexane, CAS#629-09-4 that all ref used but on lookchem (spam blacklisted).com/Molecular-Formula/C6H12I2.html, I found too CAS#55290-40-9 for this compound that I don't see elsewhere. What is this CAS number ? is it wrong ? thank you for you help --Titou (talk) 07:13, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

@The Titou: 629-09-4 is 1,6-diiodohexane and 55290-40-9 is diiodohexane with unspecified substitution. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay ! thanks a lot --Titou (talk) 08:25, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Akaki Tsilosani

Prof. Akaki Tsilosani is a prominent transplant surgeon, founder of TALIZI Clinic. He is recognized worldwide as one of the leading surgeons. Member and expert of International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS). There surely should be an article about A. Tsilosani in English Wikipedia too.

If an article needs some modification please let me know exactly what to do. I contribute to Wikipedia almost 10 years and I've read policies and want to modify this article so that it will be approved. Based on international recognition among colleagues and significant contribution to hair transplant surgery development, this article meets all Wikipedia criteria. I'm sure afer re editing and correction this article will be restored. Please advice exactly how to modify the article. Thank you in advance! Zetalion (talk) 20 June 2024

The article Akaki Tsilosani was deleted by the administrator User:Deb. The reason she gave was, "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". I only deleted the talk page Talk:Akaki Tsilosani which was orphaned by the article deletion. If you have questions about the article deletion, it would be best to contact User:Deb. Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:33, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. This contributor has already been to my talk page, but presumably thinks he will get a different answer if he asks someone else. As yet he hasn't taken my advice to re-read the guidelines and go to the Teahouse in case of doubt. Deb (talk) 19:10, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

CAS numbers, Always CAS numbers

Hi Edgar,
How are you ? For my part, I can't find the CAS numbers of a pair of enantiomers C6H12, namely :

• 3-méthylpent-1-ène, numéro CAS 760-20-3 , racemate
  • (3R)-3-méthylpent-1-ène, numéro CAS ?
  • (3S)-3-méthylpent-1-ène, numéro CAS ?

Could you help me, please, as usual ^^ (i.e. with too ± descriptors, if possible) - Have a good day --Titou (talk) 05:31, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Here it is:

(R)-3-methyl-1-pentene 39914-58-4

(S)-3-methyl-1-pentene 5026-95-9

-- Ed (Edgar181) 12:14, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Super! Merci bcp! --Titou (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Propellanes and a new C6H6 isomer!

May be very more difficult to find, could you see if CAS number exists for the following compounds :

• the propellanes which appear in the article :
  • [1.1.1]propellane or tricyclo[1.1.1.0^1,3]pentane
  • [2.1.1]propellane or tricyclo[2.1.1.0^1,4]hexane
  • [2.2.1]propellane or tricyclo[2.2.1.0^1,4]heptane
  • [2.2.2]propellane or tricyclo[2.2.2.0^1,4]octane
  • [3.1.1]propellane or tricyclo[3.1.1.0^1,5]heptane
  • [3.2.1]propellane or tricyclo[3.2.1.0^1,5]octane
  • [4.1.1]propellane or tricyclo[4.1.1.0^1,6]octane
  • [3.3.3]propellane or tricyclo[3.3.3.0^1,5]undecane
  • [4.3.3]propellane or tricyclo[4.3.3.0^1,6]dodecane
  • [6.3.3]propellane or tricyclo[6.3.3.0^1,8]tetradecane
  • [10.3.3]propellane or tricyclo[10.3.3.0^1,12]octadecane
• In the ref of this article, I find : Ursula Szeimies-Seebach, Joachim Harnish, Günter Szeimies, Maurice Van Meerssche, Gabriel Germain, Jean-Paul Declerq, Existence of a New C6H6 Isomer: Tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-1(6)-ene, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl., 1978, vol. 17(11), pp. 848–850. doi:10.1002/anie.197808481. So CAS number for
  • Tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-1(6)-ene, CAS number ?
• Finally, for good measure, I forgot in C6H12, stereoisomers of 1,1,2-trimethylcyclopropane, CAS number 4127-45-1
  • cis-1,1,2-trimethylcyclopropane, CAS number ?
  • trans-1,1,2-trimethylcyclopropane, CAS number ? and correspondance between cis/trans and R/S descriptors for this pair

Whaou, if you can find all of them, you will be like the good of CAS number --Titou (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll look these up on Monday. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:35, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

@The Titou: Here is what I have found. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:04, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

[1.1.1]Propellane: 35634-10-7

[2.1.1]propellane: 36120-91-9

[2.2.1]Propellane: 36120-90-8

[2.2.2]propellane: 36120-88-4

[3.1.1]propellane: 65513-21-5

[3.2.1]propellane: 19074-25-0

[4.1.1]propellane: 51273-56-4

[3.3.3]propellane: 51027-89-5

[4.3.3]Propellane: 7161-28-6

[6.3.3]propellane: 67140-86-7

[10.3.3]propellane: 58602-52-1

Tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-1(6)-ene: 68108-93-0

1,1,2-trimethylcyclopropane does not have cis- and trans-disastereomers, only (R)- and (S)- enantiomers. Chemical Abstracts does not appear to have CAS numbers for the individual enantiomers.

Thanks a lot ! incredible you find all this CAS numbers - it's marvelous. I don't understand why enantiomers of 1,1,2-trimethylcyclopropane haven't CAS number while stereoisomers of 1-méthyl-2-éthylcyclopropane have (19781-68-1 cis, 19781-69-2 trans) and those of 1,2,3-triméthylcyclopropane too (4806-59-1 r-1,c-2,t-3- , 4806-58-0 r-1,c-2,c-3-)... bizarre = strange...

Really thank you very much for your help! regards --Titou (talk) 18:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello E. Thanks for your quick actions in dealing with the troll (ips and named users) who is messing around. In case you haven't seen it yet this unblock request is kind of funny - like a block at WikiP keeps people off the net entirely. Hmmmm might be worth requesting this feature at VPT :-) Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 21:33, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm glad to help. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:34, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

spamblacklistblock

Hi Edgar, I have taken the freedom to re-block 95.79.200.177 using {{spamblacklistblock}} as reason (it is available in Twinkle). As this one, for these IPs one also needs to withdraw talkpage access. As can be seen from Special:Log/spamblacklist/95.79.200.177, half of their edits are attempts to spam on their own talkpages, and they keep obscuring the log with that (see these 500 attempts). Cheers. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 12:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I hadn't noticed that spamblacklistblock was one of the default block options. I'll be sure to use it in the future and to remove talk page access. Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:16, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

E-mail

Hello, Edgar181. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Linguist If you reply here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to your message 19:20, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

C6H6 isomers

Hi,

Yesterday, you give the CAS number for (2s,5s)-tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-1(6)-ene 68108-93-0 and benzvalene or (1s,2r,5r,6s)-tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-3-ene have too one, 659-85-8 . I think may be "they" give too CAS number to other isomers of tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hexene. So I chek those with ChemSketch and finally I found :

• Tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hexene
  • (5R,6R)-tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-1-ene, numéro CAS ?
  • (5S,6S)-tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-1-ene, numéro CAS ?
  • (2s,5s)-tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-1(6)-ene, numéro CAS 68108-93-0
  • (1R,5r,6S)-tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-2-ène, numéro CAS ?
  • (1s,2r,5r,6s)-tricyclo[3.1.0.0^2,6]hex-3-ene or benzvalene , numéro CAS 659-85-8

Please, could you see if the three missing CAS numbers exist for those isomers, may be not still synthetized.... thank you for your help --Titou (talk) 10:37, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I am unable to find CAS numbers for those compounds. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:17, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Does it that means those CAS numbers don't exist?? --Titou (talk) 19:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Normally, I would be confident that if I can't find a CAS number by searching Chemical Abstracts then that number doesn't exist. But in this case, the names and chemical structures are complicated enough that I may have missed something - I can't be 100% sure. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:32, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Aquatic ape hypothesis

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Aquatic ape hypothesis. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Acetyldigoxin.png

Hi Ed. This structure shows in fact α-acetyldigoxin, right? What about moving Acetyldigoxin since there is also β-acetyldigoxin? --Leyo 09:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I think only one article is needed - just one to cover the isomer that is used in medicine. But after a quick Google search, I can't determine which isomer it is. Do you know? I can create an image for the β isomer if needed. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:21, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

AFAIK the difference is the location of the acetyl group (α, β). There is an image of the β isomer in de:β-Acetyldigoxin. --Leyo 21:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

It looks like the English article should be about β isomer too. I'll translate the German article and switch the infobox to match that isomer. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:15, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

If you do so, please adapt d:Q4673300 and d:Q18030160 accordingly. --Leyo 22:10, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

E-mail

Hello, Edgar181. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Linguist If you reply here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to your message 19:39, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

1,1-bis(diméthylamino)éthanol

Hi Edgar,

On the page fr:Tétrakis(diméthylamino)éthylène, it tokes about the reaction's intermediaire 1,1-bis(diméthylamino)éthanol, C6H16N2O, PubChem CID 18534497. Could you see if this product appears in Chemical Abstracts and have a CAS number, please? --Titou (talk) 04:25, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

@The Titou: 1,1-bis(dimethylamino)ethanol does not have a record in Chemical Abstracts. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thank you --Titou (talk) 04:59, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

DAV Centenary Cricket Team (Paschim Vihar) Delhi

Hi Edgar181. You deleted DAV Centenary Cricket (Paschim Vihar) per WP:G2. It looks like the article was created the same day it was deleted under a different name as DAV Centenary Cricket Team (Paschim Vihar) Delhi. I've tagged the recreation per WP:A3, but am wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look at it to see if it should go to AfD instead. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Just to update, the article was deleted per A3 and A8 by AustralianRupert -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:18, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

No conflict of interest

Ed-- Currently working on the ipraglifozin (suglat) page and you pointed out a possible conflict of interest. However, I have no connection to either company. I do believe that a company's background and financial information is relevant when learning about a drug they are promoting. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brru224 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

@Brru224: OK, that's fine. It's just a common occurrence with articles about pharmaceutical drugs. Feel free to remove the message from your talk page. As for the financial information about the two companies involved, that information seems completely out of place to me - it would be appropriate for an article about the companies themselves, but not about the drug. For the cost of the drug, prices change so much with time, place, purchaser, insurance, etc. that it is generally not possible to provide universally accurate information about costs. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Edgar181.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help

Hi Edgar181,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

COI Inquiry

Hi Edgar181,

I wanted to let you know that I don't have a conflict of interest with the Venetoclax page I have been editing. I am a university student in pharmaceutical sciences, doing independent research on the drug.

Thanks!

EmilyDaley — Preceding unsigned comment added by EmilyDaley (talk • contribs) 22:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, no problem. (Please feel free to remove the message on your talk page if you want.) I guess your edits just looked like the work of a professional. :) -- Ed (Edgar181) 22:47, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

GS-5734

Hi Edgar. Any chance you could work out the name of this molecule for me? Bit too many stereocenters for me, especially around that phosphorus! Not on PubChem yet, I'm guessing it doesn't have a CAS# either? Meodipt (talk) 13:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I have added the IUPAC name derived by an old version of ChemDraw that I have (but I'm not 100% sure it is accurate). GS-5734 does have a CAS Number assigned, which I have added too. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Talk page protection request

Hi - I think You have rats dead! might be looking for a holiday from editing their talk page. Since you're the blocking admin, perhaps you could grant them that wish? --bonadea contributions talk 13:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Looks like another admin has already taken care of it. Thanks. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:58, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Edgar181. 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)

Pls review a new article

Hi there,

I have noticed that you have recently improved my article uvitic acid. Now I have created uvitonic acid. May you review it and add a chemical infobox?

Cheerz! Lamro (talk) 08:08, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

It looks good to me. I see you added the infobox, so I just added an image. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:08, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dental caries

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dental caries. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

RAJA NAIPOSPOS

I'm not really going to argue with your deletion of RAJA NAIPOSPOS, but just wanted to check that you actually read my comment on the talk page and took that into account before deleting. SpinningSpark 10:26, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I remember putting the article and talk page comments through Google Translate, but I may have missed your comment at the bottom. Looking at page again, I think it might be possible to write an acceptable article on the topic, but it would certainly require sources to establish notability (and would need to be written in English), so I wouldn't object if someone recreated the article under those conditions. In any case, I still think the article as it stood met criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks for your diligent followup. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:01, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

History of chemistry

My link was GOOOOD. Ps.And it not my website!
95.49.111.218 (talk)

Please have a look at WP:EL. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

One more to review

Hi there,

May you please review Ustilagic acid? I am not able to identify correct categories.

Cheers! Lamro (talk) 14:58, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

No problem. I'll take a look a little later today. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:59, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lamro: It looks complicated. There appears to be at least 3 chemical compounds with that name: ustilagic acid A, ustilagic acid A, and ustilagic acid C. PubChem, Chemspider, SciFinder, and Reaxys are not consistent about the identity of each. And the description of "ustilagic acid" at the cyberlipid.org page linked from the article encompasses even more chemical structures. Maybe is it best to remove the chembox and write the article from the point of view of a class of related chemical compounds with similar properties and biological functions, rather than as one specific compound. -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:10, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

What is the difference between {{Db-a11}}, {{Db-invented}}, {{Db-madeup}} and {{Db-hoax}}? Hoax and invented are similar but they are marked as G3 ans A11. --Marvellous Spider-Man 14:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Basically, {{Db-a11}} is for an article that is about something that is real, but was just invented by the person writing about it. {{Db-g3}} is for an article that is not real - completely fake. For example, if I make up a game called "Fun sport ball" and play it with all my friends at school and then create an article for it, that's {{Db-a11}}; but if I write about a game called "Fun sport ball" which supposedly has professional leagues in many nations and which Lebron James stars in, that's a hoax, {{Db-g3}}. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:58, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Perilla

An article that you have been involved in editing—Perilla—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Diospireiro (talk) 10:55, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Edgar, thank you for deleting Pizzagate investigation. You may want to warn and/or block the article creator, and also note likely related to incoming Trolls from Olgino, more info on that at [1] and [2]. Sagecandor (talk) 00:08, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Trolls from Olgino is something new to me. I'll take a look. Thanks. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:09, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Also more research I've done is at Fake news website on section Fake news website#Russia for info on possible incoming activity. However, [3] is also most informative and revealing. where hundreds of paid bloggers work round the clock" ... Sagecandor (talk) 00:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Some problems

Hi Ed,

unfortunately, I tried to publish my first article 3 times and I can not understand where the problem is.

Maybe,

Problem of set my user page ? Problem of neutral point of view ? Problem of links

I got a first Submission declined on 7 November 2016 where the problem was "structural" But now it looks to be a different problem

Can you tell me more ? or give me an advice.

Thank you in advance for all.

Regards

Page : Draft:Septodont

Nolanmiton (talk) 10:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Nolanmiton, it looks like the draft was declined because it appeared promotional in nature. That is an assessment that I would agree with. The company may be notable enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia, but it would need to be written from a more neutral point of view. Also, you may want to take a look at WP:COI, which may apply here. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Question about "Vaccine" updates

The changes I made should stand, as they are entirely truthful, and documented by the CDC, along with proof from the CDC in the form of a link. Therefore my edits should stand and be left alone. Instead, they are being removed. This is the second time it was removed, so I am wondering what the purpose is of removing truthful and accurate information. I figured rather than putting it up again, I would attempt to find out the reasoning to delete truthful information. At this point, it just seems that some want this hidden, and no one should hide facts from those wanting to research any medical choice, such as vaccines.

I reworded this:
"Egg protein is present in influenza and yellow fever vaccines as they are prepared using chicken eggs. Other proteins may be present."
to say this:
"Egg protein is present in influenza and yellow fever vaccines as they are prepared using chicken eggs. Other proteins may be present, such as human fetal DNA from aborted babies, fetal bovine serum, human serum albumin, porcine DNA, bovine serum albumin, and other animal DNA"

The only thing I can think of would be changing "human fetal DNA from aborted babies" to "recombinant human albumin" or "human albumin", or "WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts", or "MRC-5 cells", or "human diploid cell cultures (WI-38)", or any of the various ways they explain it, but ultimately, you are still talking about human aborted fetal cells. I didn't add the guinea pig DNA that is in varicella, because that isn't in as much. But between the others I listed below, you get all the main methods of DNA in vaccines.

Thank you in advance for your reply.

References

199.74.155.50 (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Your edit was rightly reverted. If you have different content to propose please do so on the article talk page at Talk:Vaccine. Jytdog (talk) 19:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

There were several issues that I had with the edit. One was that "other proteins" is inconsistent with various types of DNA in the list, which are not proteins. The other issue is, of course, "human fetal DNA from aborted babies" which (as I'm sure you know) was not supported at all by the reference you cited. The comment you have made about alternative phrasings that are supposedly equivalent to "human aborted fetal cells" is just plain wrong. -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:09, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

"other proteins" was what was originally there, I just expanded on them. How it was worded before made it seem like it was egg or other. And it is egg, human, porcine, bovine, guinea pig and other DNA. And how exactly is "WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts" in your opinion is not from an aborted human baby? That is exactly what it is... Even Wikipedia knows that, as you can see at WI-38. The CDC pdf I referenced listed the names that I expanded on. And if you do further research on each name, you can easily find that is from a specific aborted human fetus. Instead of naming all the separate babies, I listed the type of DNA it was, human, animal, etc... 47.185.111.92 (talk) 03:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

If you cannot even understand how someone could view a cell culture and a human baby as different, then there isn't any point in having a conversation. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:59, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I think it is also important to those who are against things like abortion to easily find information that a vaccine contains cell cultures from a baby. They have the right to accurate information, which the CDC also provides. So it ultimately seems like you are against stating this was from a human baby. In that case, then I shall word it differently. Would it be okay to place the reworded information here so that maybe we can come to an agreement on wording so that my edits are not reverted so quickly? 70.196.13.69 (talk) 14:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

You're misrepresenting what I said. The best place to suggest edits to the article is on the article's talk page, talk:vaccine. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I did put this there on the article talk page, but you are responding here after it was on the article talk page. So I responded back rather than ignoring it... 69.78.235.130 (talk) 17:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I see now - it's kind of hard to follow your edits when each one is attributed to a different IP address. I'll take a look at the talk page there. (And sorry for the slow reply, I've been traveling.) -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:39, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Milo Yiannopoulos

Hi Edgar, Thank you for your note. There are many people listed on Wikipedia as journalists who are not, on both the left and right ends of the political spectrum. The occupation "journalist" means something very specific, and is applicable to people who adhere to certain processes and norms in their work, including fact checking, source verification, and limits on the inclusion of opinion. The person in question here is akin to an op/ed writer for a newspaper, which is a perfectly legitimate and very necessary job, just one that is different from that of a journalist. I believe Wikipedia should be more interested in accuracy than anything else. Thank you. Amywestervelt (talk) 17:08, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, equivalent commentators on the left (Rachel Maddow, Cenk Ugyer, etc) are listed as commentators, activists, pundits, not journalists. Amywestervelt (talk) 17:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources routinely refer to Milo Yiannopoulos as a journalist. Try this Google News search, for example. (Hopefully that link works right.) So our article should reflect that. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Repetition of an error does not make it accurate, surely? If that's the criteria, you can get a similar list of results from reliable sources (The Hill, The Independent, etc) if you search for Milo Yiannopoulos and "commentator". Similarly you can get a host of reliable sources referring to Rachel Maddow as a journalist, but she is (rightly) listed as a commentator on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amywestervelt (talk • contribs) 04:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

For reference here is the American Press Institute's (a nonprofit journalism training org founded in 1946 as an extension of Columbia Journalism School) take on the elements that constitute journalism (this is the definition agreed upon by most US journalism associations): https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/elements-journalism/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amywestervelt (talk • contribs) 04:42, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

One of Wikipedia's core tenets is that it strives to reflect what reliable sources say. This should remain the case even if it does not reflect our own personal perceptions. Personally, I don't share your opinion that Wikipedia is repeating an error. In this case, I think you are making an unfounded assumption that Rachel Maddow and Milo Yiannopoulos have had the same career history and currently have the same roles, and therefore Wikipedia must use the same terminology to refer to each of them. Also, there is no reason that an individual cannot be referred to as both a journalist and a commentator depending on context or whether they have played each of those roles in different parts of their career. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:04, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

RFC/N discussion of the username "TNPoliticsNews"

A request for comment has been filed concerning the username of TNPoliticsNews (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion here. Linguist If you reply to me here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to the start of your message 19:27, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I think that was for telithromycin, not solithromycin.

See my edit in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solithromycin#Structure.

The sentence was discussing telithromycin, not solithromycin:

"Although both telithromycin and solithromycin are ketolides, solithromycin does not share the pyridine-imidazole group of the telithromycin side chain (Fig. 1)." (from the linked 2010 research paper)

--Agamemnus (talk) 00:39, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Agamemnus: Yes, you are right. I misread it thinking the pyridine comment was incorrectly referring to solithromycin. Thanks for correcting it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:47, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Psychiatric medication - fluoxetine edit

Dear Edgar181,

I wanted to share with you the following scientific information: https://ravimid.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/psychiatric-drug-withdrawal-can-be-disabling-010314-1.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipediancag (talk • contribs) 07:30, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I understand that there can be serious conditions associated with the discontinuation of fluoxetine and other SSRIs. But the wording that you added (assuming 188.26.63.193 is you) was not consistent with what reliable medical sources say, and that the reference used to support that content was not compliant with Wikipedia's guidelines for medical citations - please see WP:MEDRS for details. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

User:FPPA

Dear Edgar, in March you deleted my user page User:FPPA. I have seen the "why" bit but I still don't understand what the problem is, so that I can put it right and have my user page back. Please could you explain more clearly? Regards, Roy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FPPA (talk • contribs) 19:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

In the deletion log, I gave WP:CSD#U5 as the reason, but the page does not appear to meet that criteria for deletion. I can only say that it must have been an error. Consequently, I have restored the page. My apologies. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Ph3P=NPh

Hi Edgar: you are more of an organicker than me, so if you have a more appropriate name for this thing, please move it or leave a note here, and I will do the moving. Triphenylphosphine phenylimide. Cheers and Merry Christmas, --Smokefoot (talk) 21:31, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

@Smokefoot: Just from looking around online, "triphenylphosphine phenylimide" is indeed one of the many names that is used for this compound, so it's not wrong. Based on Google search results, I think "tetraphenylphosphine imide" is used more commonly though. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

OK, I think I will leave it alone because I dont like the tetraphenyl ... thing, which seems to convey little structural info. --Smokefoot (talk) 15:18, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Works for me. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:26, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:16, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Merry Christmas to you too. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:56, 28 December 2016 (UTC)