This user is an American.
This user has autopatrolled rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has autoconfirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user uses HotCat to work with categories.
This user has AutoWikiBrowser permissions on the English Wikipedia.
This user uses STiki to fight vandalism.
This user uses Twinkle to fight vandalism.
This user has a Global Account.
This user has been editing Wikipedia for at least fifteen years.
This user is a "Master Editor IV" on Wikipedia.

User talk:Drbogdan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome To Dr. Dennis Bogdan's ("Master Editor IV") Talk Page

Welcome!

Hello, Drbogdan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!   Will Beback  talk  03:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

During a backpacking trip
Near the top of the Peak at about 14,000 feet


LIFE, EARTH and the UNIVERSE[edit]

ART: Renoir's "Luncheon of the Boating Party” (1881) – Since 1923, At The *Phillips Gallery* In Washington, DC – Near My Apartment During My *GW University* Days – NEWS (11/24/2020).

Adrien Maggiolo (Italian journalist)Affenpinscher dogAline Charigot (seamstress and Renoir's future wife)Alphonse Fournaise, Jr. (owner's son)Angèle Legault (actress)Charles Ephrussi (art historian)Ellen Andrée (actress)Eugène Pierre Lestringez (bureaucrat)Gustave Caillebotte (artist)Jeanne Samary (actress)Jules Laforgue (poet and critic)LandscapeLandscapeLouise-Alphonsine Fournaise (owner's daughter)Paul Lhote (artist)Baron Raoul Barbier (former mayor of colonial Saigon)SailboatsStill lifeunknown personRenoir - Boating Party
The image above contains clickable linksClickable image of the Luncheon of the Boating Party (1881) by Pierre-Auguste Renoir (The Phillips Collection, Washington, D.C.). Place your mouse cursor over a person in the painting to see their name; click to link to an article about them.

Mars landing locations[edit]

Acheron FossaeAcidalia PlanitiaAlba MonsAmazonis PlanitiaAonia PlanitiaArabia TerraArcadia PlanitiaArgentea PlanumArgyre PlanitiaChryse PlanitiaClaritas FossaeCydonia MensaeDaedalia PlanumElysium MonsElysium PlanitiaGale craterHadriaca PateraHellas MontesHellas PlanitiaHesperia PlanumHolden craterIcaria PlanumIsidis PlanitiaJezero craterLomonosov craterLucus PlanumLycus SulciLyot craterLunae PlanumMalea PlanumMaraldi craterMareotis FossaeMareotis TempeMargaritifer TerraMie craterMilankovič craterNepenthes MensaeNereidum MontesNilosyrtis MensaeNoachis TerraOlympica FossaeOlympus MonsPlanum AustralePromethei TerraProtonilus MensaeSirenumSisyphi PlanumSolis PlanumSyria PlanumTantalus FossaeTempe TerraTerra CimmeriaTerra SabaeaTerra SirenumTharsis MontesTractus CatenaTyrrhen TerraUlysses PateraUranius PateraUtopia PlanitiaValles MarinerisVastitas BorealisXanthe TerraMap of Mars
The image above contains clickable links Interactive image map of the global topography of Mars, overlain with locations of Mars Lander and Rover sites. Hover your mouse over the image to see the names of over 60 prominent geographic features, and click to link to them. Coloring of the base map indicates relative elevations, based on data from the Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter on NASA's Mars Global Surveyor. Whites and browns indicate the highest elevations (+12 to +8 km); followed by pinks and reds (+8 to +3 km); yellow is 0 km; greens and blues are lower elevations (down to −8 km). Axes are latitude and longitude; Polar regions are noted.
(   Active ROVER  Inactive  Active LANDER  Inactive  Future )
Beagle 2
Bradbury Landing
Deep Space 2
Columbia Memorial Station
InSight Landing
Mars 2
Mars 3
Mars 6
Mars Polar Lander
Challenger Memorial Station
Mars 2020


Green Valley
Schiaparelli EDM
Carl Sagan Memorial Station
Columbia Memorial Station
Tianwen-1


Thomas Mutch Memorial Station
Gerald Soffen Memorial Station
Acheron FossaeAcidalia PlanitiaAlba MonsAmazonis PlanitiaAonia PlanitiaArabia TerraArcadia PlanitiaArgentea PlanumArgyre PlanitiaChryse PlanitiaClaritas FossaeCydonia MensaeDaedalia PlanumElysium MonsElysium PlanitiaGale craterHadriaca PateraHellas MontesHellas PlanitiaHesperia PlanumHolden craterIcaria PlanumIsidis PlanitiaJezero craterLomonosov craterLucus PlanumLycus SulciLyot craterLunae PlanumMalea PlanumMaraldi craterMareotis FossaeMareotis TempeMargaritifer TerraMie craterMilankovič craterNepenthes MensaeNereidum MontesNilosyrtis MensaeNoachis TerraOlympica FossaeOlympus MonsPlanum AustralePromethei TerraProtonilus MensaeSirenumSisyphi PlanumSolis PlanumSyria PlanumTantalus FossaeTempe TerraTerra CimmeriaTerra SabaeaTerra SirenumTharsis MontesTractus CatenaTyrrhen TerraUlysses PateraUranius PateraUtopia PlanitiaValles MarinerisVastitas BorealisXanthe TerraMap of Mars
The image above contains clickable links Interactive image map of the global topography of Mars, overlain with locations of Mars Memorial sites. Hover your mouse over the image to see the names of over 60 prominent geographic features, and click to link to them. Coloring of the base map indicates relative elevations, based on data from the Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter on NASA's Mars Global Surveyor. Whites and browns indicate the highest elevations (+12 to +8 km); followed by pinks and reds (+8 to +3 km); yellow is 0 km; greens and blues are lower elevations (down to −8 km). Axes are latitude and longitude; Polar regions are noted.
(   Named  Debris  Lost )
Beagle 2
Curiosity
Deep Space 2
InSight
Mars 2
Mars 3
Mars 6
Mars Polar Lander
Opportunity
Pereverance
Phoenix
Schiaparelli EDM lander
Pathfinder
Spirit
Viking 1
Viking 2
Mars Landing Sites (16 December 2020]

"2022 in science" moved to draftspace[edit]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2022 in science[edit]

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 to inform you that a tag has been placed on 2022 in science requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. 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. Ionmars10 (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

An article you recently created, 2022 in science, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. –MJLTalk 04:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Instead of spamming your page with like a bunch of these [sd notes], I'm just going to let you know now that I'm going to also nominate years 2032 to 2050. We're going to need to talk about this. Face-troubled.svg (edit conflict)MJLTalk 04:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
@MJL: @Ionmars10: Thank you for your comments - and efforts - seems creating the basic starting pages (in outline form) of "2022 in Science" inclusive to "2050 in science" - without more sources and related - could have been a better effort on my part after all - seemed, at the time, doing the pages in a batch effort would be better than doing the pages individually at some later time - guess not - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
[Thank you for the ping] Yeah, probably lol. Well, you got at least one outline to work with now! :D –MJLTalk 14:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
@MJL and Drbogdan: I've deleted the 2022 and beyond pages. Drbogdan, I appreciate the effort and thought. Just a bit too soon for those. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Your Articles for creation: 2022 in science has been accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
2022 in science, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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

The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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

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

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

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 18:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

"Christina Koch" astronaut - time spent in space[edit]

Hi! - Just wanted to mention I updated Christina Koch to reflect that she attained the record of longest *single* spaceflight as opposed to the overall record - the reference you cited clearly indicates this. Just a heads up! :) Jewell D D (talk) 00:04, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Jewell D D: Thank you for your comments - they're appreciated - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 02:30, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Brief followup - a relevant NYT reference[1] has been added to the "Christina Koch" article - should be ok - please comment if otherwise of course - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:55, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Kowal, Mary Robinette (February 6, 2020). "Christina Koch Lands on Earth, and Crosses a Threshold for Women in Space - The astronaut completed three all-female spacewalks and set a record for time in space, but you should remember her for much more". The New York Times. Retrieved February 6, 2020.

"Timothy Leary" edits[edit]

There has been extensive discussion on Talk. It is difficult to build consensus when only one other person appears to be reading Talk. If you have knowledge of the subject matter, your involvement would be appreciated. BillHaywood (talk) 17:33, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

@BillHaywood: Thank you for your comments - seems WP:CONSENSUS for your edits is required before adding them to the main article - there's no such agreement at the moment - seems some editors have taken issue with the edits; while still other editors may be aware of your edits but, by choosing not to post support, may not be agreeable to them - this may (or may not) change in time - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:05, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

"Quadratic equation"[edit]

Hi there, regarding this revert by Deacon Vorbis, see also Talk:Quadratic formula#Po-Shen Loh. Face-smile.svg Cheers! - DVdm (talk) 14:25, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

@DVdm: Thank you very much for your comments - and link to the talk-page re the edit-add of the NYT reference[1] to the "Quadratic equation" article - yes - *entirely* agree - NYT is not an official professional source for the Quadratic equation - no problem whatsoever - with the revert or otherwise - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

References

"More Music from Peter Gunn" ≠ "The Music from Peter Gunn"[edit]

"More Music from Peter Gunn" and "The Music from Peter Gunn" are two different albums (both 1959). Therefore a redirect from "More Music from Peter Gunn" to "The Music from Peter Gunn" is wrong. I blanked it. What should be done with More Music from Peter Gunn? Remove? – Patricia Tegtmeier (talk) 07:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Result of Redirect Discussion: "KEEP" - Steel1943 (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of More Music from Peter Gunn[edit]

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 to inform you that a tag has been placed on More Music from Peter Gunn requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. 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. Postcard Cathy (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

"More Music from Peter Gunn" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect More Music from Peter Gunn. Since you had some involvement with the More Music from Peter Gunn redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone involved! – Patricia Tegtmeier (talk) 00:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

"Hemolithin" - History section[edit]

Dear Dr Bogdan, The Hemolithin wiki article would benefit from a History of the research - this might encourage more serious scientific discussion. I need to send via Email a word file for you to place at the end of the current wiki Hemolithin. May I do this - there is a graph time line and taxt - I cannot add the graph image without your help? Julie mcgeoch@fas.harvard.edu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcgeoch (talkcontribs) 14:39, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

@Mcgeoch: (Note: copy of this reply also sent via email) Thank you very much for your Wikipedia comments - and suggestions - can't promise anything at the moment, but can look at your suggested material and see what might be useful (best if cited in some way in "reliable sources" => "Wikipedia:Reliable sources", otherwise the material may be considered "original research" => "WP:NOR" - which may not be allowed) - and what may be permitted depending on current Wikipedia policies and practices - hope this helps in some way - at least for starters - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

"Higgs boson"[edit]

Hello sir. I currently have no idea of how to direct message you, however, I need to inquire an old and seemingly obsolete question in some eyes, what exactly is the so called "Higgs Boson"? I've done research on it and have found long and similarly vague answers from all sorts of sources, and I've found that you of all people may be able to help me, seeing as you're qualified for alot of things, may you explain it in a way of simple manner to me? I've asked all sorts of people and they've only produced vague and bad awnsers to me, so now I'm putting my hope in a stranger online SCP 1174 (talk) 06:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@SCP 1174: - Thank you for your comments - seems the best answer to this is on the "Higgs boson" Wikipedia article itself - however - a simpler version may be found on the "Simple Wikipedia" at the following link => "simple:Higgs boson" - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! Drbogdan (talk) 12:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

"Fomalhaut b"[edit]

Thanks for helping edit the article to keep it up-to-date. I rewrote the lead section a bit, but it's going to need a lot of work. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 15:49, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@Дрейгорич: Thank you for your comments - and efforts on the "Fomalhaut b" article - should note (if you're presently unaware) that a related discussion is on the talk-page at => "Talk:Fomalhaut b#Fomalhaut "b" is not a planet" - Thanks again for your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:56, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

"Windows XP"[edit]

Development status information - Base support ended on April 14, 2009 - Extended support ended on April 8, 2014 - Full support ended on -> August 31, 2019 <- found wrong information, the right would be: -> May 21, 2019 <- because on January 24, 2020 I had made a video updating the operating system. had taken the information from the wiki's print page that day - the video is this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zmKaXMQhLI the minute 3:08 the photo information is shown - Brazilian Video. if i'm wrong, please just say. - Albertvmaia (talkcontribs) 12:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Albertvmaia: Thank you for your comments - seems you may be right about the date - however - a citation from a WP:Reliable Source (other than a Youtube video and related), supporting the new date information, would be even more helpful I would think - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Windows XP (last update proof images WSUS) => https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w_ccbb-p8BZGwlIL9XsvZTFY8R24vHzs/view?usp=sharing - reference image to Brazilian video! - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zmKaXMQhLI - May 21, 2019! - Full support ended on August 31, 2019 - please ask for the edition of the Windows XP page. - in Full support ended on --> August 31, 2019 <-- --> May 21, 2019! <-- :) - Albertvmaia (talkcontribs) 04:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
I just want to conclude with these two photos are on the day they shoot the video for internet - I hope your doubts are over. page information: January 24, 2020! - Wiki: Windows XP (USA) - Wiki: Windows XP (Brazil) - Photo of evidence and annotated systems - Evidence of data! - I found it on my computer and remembered that I had saved it and enjoy and update Windows 7 and 8.1 today at the same time before recording my videos for 2023 and 2024 - if there is any change I will alert you - if nothing changes on the US page and not here is fine - matter closed! - Albertvmaia (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

"Earliest known life forms"[edit]

Hello. In the article LUCA, it is stated that "Studies from 2000–2018 have suggested an increasingly ancient time for LUCA. In 2000, estimations suggested LUCA existed 3.5 to 3.8 billion years ago in the Paleoarchean era,[7][8] a few hundred million years before the earliest fossil evidence of life (…). A 2018 study from the University of Bristol, applying a molecular clock model, places the LUCA shortly after 4.5 billion years ago, within the Hadean.[16][17]" I propose to add the information to the paragraph about LUCA in the section "Earliest life forms", I feel the update would be accurate. Thank you in advance. Have a nice day! --Jojnee (talk) 11:30, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jojnee: Thank you for your comments - and recommended edit re LUCA - yes - agreed - seems the proposed edit would be ok - no problem whatsoever - Thanks again for your comments and all - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:14, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

PS. I apologise to bother you once again. Recently, I've edited the article Retroposon, I put a (wiki)link to "retropseudogenes" (processed pseudogenes) to make it more clear for readers. Because there seems to be no consensus regarding the proper terminology (e.g., some authors tend to use the words "retrogene" and "retropseudogene" interchangeably), I decided to use a term commonly employed by scientists—"retro(pseudo)genes". Since you're a scientist as well as an experienced Wikipedia user and pending changes reviewer, could I ask you to review the edit? Especially, I mean the way I added a link to the other article, I tried my best to do it properly, but is it OK with the WP standards? Thank you very much in advance! Cheers, --Jojnee (talk) 16:10, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Jojnee: Thanks for your comments - and suggested review - at first glance, and afaik atm, the edit re wikicode may be ok - however - there may be no mention of "retropseudogene" or "retro(pseudo)genes" in the cited reference - perhaps the language in the cited ref should be used? - iac - hope this helps in some way - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 17:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply, I appreciate it. Yes, I understand. Perhaps a good solution will be to cite in refs the book that I read. It states: Retro(pseudo)genes are products of reverse transcription of a spliced (mature) mRNA. (…) Retro(pseudo)genes like other retrotransposons have been inserted into the genome as double-stranded sequence generated from a single-stranded RNA. Processed pseudogenes, as sometimes retropseudogenes are called, have been generated (…) However, not all retroposed messages have to end up as pseudogenes. (p. 166). I planned to add it, but had some troubles while trying to prepare a proper citation format. --Jojnee (talk) 18:55, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for the recent edit. I wonder if it would be better to replace "the universal common ancestor" with a simple "the LUCA" in the second sentence (the one regarding a 2018 study). It is a small thing, but perhaps would save some space. Kind regards, --Jojnee (talk) 16:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Jojnee: - Thank you for your comments - and suggestion - yes - *entirely* agree - the article has been updated - Thanks again - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 16:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

"Neutron star"[edit]

Just wanted to extend thanks for finding and adding that infographic! Wish I'd found it first ;) --Marx01 Tell me about it 11:40, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Marx01: - Thank you for your comment - if interested, there's two types of the infographic: Horizontal "(File:PIA23863-NeutronStars-Types-20200624.jpg |thumb|center|800px|< div align="center">Neutron Star Types (24 June 2020))" and Vertical "(File:PIA23863-NeutronStarTypes-20200624.jpg |thumb|center|800px|< div align="center">Neutron Star Types (24 June 2020))" - Besides the "Neutron star" article, the infographic may also be relevant to the "Magnetar" and "Pulsar" articles I would think atm - iac - Thanks again - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 11:59, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! I'll send these out to the astro folks I work with! :D --Marx01 Tell me about it 12:50, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

"Film1932: Blonde Venus (Marlene Dietrich)"[edit]

--Orphaned non-free image File:Film1932-BlondeVenus-OriginalCriterionBluRayCover.jpg--
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Film1932-BlondeVenus-OriginalCriterionBluRayCover.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

"COVID-19 drug development"[edit]

I found a CCR5 antagonist in May that showed promise for treating COVID-19 and have been following its progress. Last week the company announced that its phase 2 mild/moderate trial had achieved statistical significance for one of its endpoints and submitted an EUA based on those results and it's April phase 2b/3 severe/critcal trial that is underway. I noticed that it wasn't on the COVID-19 drug development page so I created an account and proposed text for it on the talk page. The edit was denied so I revised the entry, explained a bit about different classes of monoclonal antibodies and provided more background information. It is entirely possible that I am misunderstanding this biologic's significance for treating C19. It is also possible that I am misunderstanding the standards for inclusion on the page, but the feedback I received didn't communicate that in a way that I understood and the reasons provided for refusal seemed inaccurate. I was hoping that you would take a look at the discussion at Talk:COVID-19 drug development. If you choose to share any thoughts about the discussion or how I can improve in my research I would be grateful. --TwoCandlesInTheDark (talk) 02:42, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@TwoCandlesInTheDark: Thank you for your comments - and request to review your suggested edit to the COVID-19 drug development article on the related talk-page - at first glance, seems your comments, and those of others (esp User:Zefr) are excellent - and appropriate for Wikipedia discussions re such issues - seems best to see how the discussion develops - others, more knowledgeable than I at the moment re the issue, may share further relevant comments I would think - in any case - hope this helps in some way - Thanks again for your own comments - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look and sharing your thoughts. Sometimes it is difficult to determine the merit of a position as a participant in a discussion. You have helped me align my enthusiasm with reality. I appreciate your assessment and agree that input from domain experts would be the best next step. TwoCandlesInTheDark (talk) 17:13, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

"Book2021: Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth"[edit]

As a heads up, I have moved Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth to draft space at Draft:Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth per WP:TOOSOON. Notability hasn't been demonstrated, but given a release date in the near future, it may get there at some point. I've also removed links and redirects as appropriate. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

--Orphaned non-free image File:ExtraterrestrialFirstIntelligentBeyondEarth-BookCover.jpg--
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ExtraterrestrialFirstIntelligentBeyondEarth-BookCover.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

"LocationOfEarth" - Kudos for your template[edit]

Dear Dr. Dennis Bogdan:
Would it please be possible for you to add left-right scrolling to the otherwise excellent "LocationOfEarth" template? I'm appealing to you, since you seem to have made the most extensive, recent formatting changes.
The "LocationOfEarth" template shows too wide for some screens. It needs a left-right scrollbar in those cases where it exceeds 100% of the available window width. Being over-confident and adventuresome, I have tried and failed to use the "wide template", "scrolling", and "scrollable" templates, to add scrolling, and changing the "style" directive inside the template; I have failed. While I might aspire to be an emerging master editor of "math" notation (my own field), this job would appear to need a more masterful editor.
The only template that appears as if I could make it work is the "scrolling table" template, but that would require a conversion of the entire template into table format, rather than a minor tweak of its as-is formatting. That is more drastic than I'm comfortable with; it usually gets me in trouble. Could you please help?
Regards from Oregon/
Dr. Tom Lougheed
Astro-Tom-ical (talk) 02:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Astro-Tom-ical: Hello Tom - Thank you *very much* for your comments, kudos and request - they're all appreciated - my "LocationOfEarth" template was made with very basic skills and informations - some of my own earlier related template testing could be found here => "User:Drbogdan/sandbox-timelines-01" - and especially here => "User:Drbogdan/sandbox-timelines-01#Earth series" - I'm unable at this time to do more advanced template coding, including scrolling - however - several suggestions - you may like to experiment with this further yourself (perhaps in the "Template:LocationOfEarth/sandbox") - or - make a completely new and different template (similar, but this time with scrolling) - or - you may ask for advanced template help with this at "Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)" - I would think the advanced template coders there would be more than happy to help you with your template ideas - hope this helps in some way - Thanks again for your comments and all - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Dennis - Drbogdan (talk) 13:43, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Astro-Tom-ical: and others - Brief Followup - Seems the "Template:LocationOfEarth" itself may not continue to be available in article space for one reason or another (see here, here and, to some extent, here) - however - the underlying template source code may still be useful in some way - if interested, the underlying template source code is as follows:
{{multiple image|align=center|direction=horizontal|background color= |width= |caption_align=center|header_background= |header_align=center|header=[[Universe|Location of the Earth in the Universe]]|image1=The Earth seen from Apollo 17.jpg|width1=88|caption1=[[Earth]]|image2=Montagem Sistema Solar.jpg|width2=115|caption2=[[Solar System]]|image3=Rho Ophiuchi.jpg|width3=90|caption3=[[Gould Belt]]|image4=Milky Way Arms ssc2008-10.svg|width4=98|caption4=[[Orion Arm]]|image5=Artist's impression of the Milky Way (updated - annotated).jpg|width5=88|caption5=[[Milky Way]]|image6=Local Group and nearest galaxies.jpg|width6=120|caption6=[[Local Group|Local Group]]|image7=Local supercluster-ly.jpg|width7=93|caption7=[[Virgo Supercluster|Virgo SCl]]|image8=Observable universe r2.jpg|width8=90|caption8=[[Laniakea Supercluster|Laniakea SCl]]|image9=Observable Universe with Measurements 01.png|width9=90|caption9=[[Observable universe|Our Universe]]|footer_background= |footer_align=center|footer= }}

- Hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Template question: Follow up[edit]

This discussion more or less answers a question you once had. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Nominations for RfD[edit]

Nominations for TfD[edit]

Aliens on 1,000 nearby stars could see us[1][edit]

Hi. Given this announcement[2] and new paper[1] ("Which stars can see Earth as a transiting exoplanet?"), it would be great to have an article on the 1,004 stars within 326 light-years that can spot Earth based on line of sight. Not sure what it would be called, however. Viriditas (talk) 07:59, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Viriditas: Good to hear from you - thank you for your comment - and suggestion - yes - saw the news[1][2][3][4][5] recently also - creating a related article seems like a good idea to me as well - possible article titles (for starters): "Earth as transiting exoplanet"; "Earth transiting Sun"; "Exoplanet Earth"; "Detecting Earth from distant stars" (current favorite); others? - in any case - Thanks again for your post - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
@Viriditas: Brief followup - decided to start the article as "Detecting Earth from distant stars", afterwards renamed to "Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems", (made "redirects" of the other suggested titles above at the moment) - can always change the article title later - hope this is *entirely* ok - Comments (and new article editing) Welcome of course - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
Might want to start User:Drbogdan/Earth Transit Zone. I think that's the best subject title at this time. Viriditas (talk) 20:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ a b c Kaltenegger, L.; Pepper, J. (20 October 2020). "Which stars can see Earth as a transiting exoplanet?". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 499 (1): L111–L115. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaa161. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
  2. ^ a b Letzer, Rafi (22 October 2020). "Aliens on 1,000 nearby stars could see us, new study suggests". Live Science. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
  3. ^ Friedlander, Blaine (21 October 2020). "Smile, wave: Some exoplanets may be able to see us, too". Cornell University. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
  4. ^ Carter, Jamie (22 October 2020). "Are We Being Watched? There Are 509 Star Systems With A Great View Of Life On Earth, Say Scientists". Forbes. Retrieved 24 October 2020.
  5. ^ Staff (2020). "5 Ways to Find a Planet". NASA. Retrieved 24 October 2020.

Nomination for AfD[edit]

Nomination of Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems 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/Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems 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. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Wow! Gone are the days when an editor could create a new article and work on it for a few minutes before being nominated for deletion. Drbogdan, I think the article can be kept, but given the obsessive paper pushers and bean counters that worship administrative rules and procedures, it would be more fruitful to move it to your user space where we can refine it first. Viriditas (talk) 19:40, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Viriditas and Prototyperspective: - Thanks for all your comments - and suggestions - related discussion at => "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems" - copies of the original article are now at => "User:Drbogdan/Earth Transit Zone" - And => "Draft:Detecting Earth from distant star-based systems" - And => "User:Drbogdan/sandbox-DetectingEarthAsExoplanet" - one of these may be a copy we can further expand I would think - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 21:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done - NOTE: re Article for Deletion (AfD) discussion => "The result was KEEP". (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 09:41, 1 November 2020 (UTC) - added by Drbogdan (talk) 17:32, 15 November 2020 (UTC) - Stay Safe and Healthy !!

"Spaceflight" WikiProject notice[edit]

RocketSunIcon.svg The Downlink The WikiProject Spaceflight Newsletter
WikiProject Notification
This is a one-time notification to all active WikiProject Spaceflight members.
The Downlink project page
I am notifying you, that The Downlink newsletter is starting up again, the first new issue will be published on the 1 November 2020.

Thanks, Terasail [Talk]

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

"Solar System" WikiProject notice[edit]

Planets2013.jpg

Thank you for your contributions on articles related to the solar system. Given that interest, have you considered joining WikiProject Solar System? We are a group of members working to improve articles related to the solar system. Please add your name at the list of participants to join with us. Questions? Ask at the discussion page of the project. Thank you. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 17:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

"Timothy Leary" refs[edit]

Hi. Please do not use the Daily Mail as you did at Joanna Harcourt-Smith and Timothy Leary. See WP:DAILYMAIL. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 16:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

@Robby.is.on: Thank you for your comments - yes - *entirely* agree - using a better ref[1] instead - should now be ok - iac - Thanks again - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 17:06, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
You too. :-) Happy editing, Robby.is.on (talk) 17:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Staff (November 13, 2020). "Joanna Harcourt-Smith partner of Timothy Leary dies aged 74". News Colony. Retrieved November 15, 2020.

"ACE 2020" notice[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

"USA News: Attempted Coup - My Comments"[edit]

FWIW - seems relevant here as well - should be *entirely* ok of course - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 18:25, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Copied from the "2020 United States presidential election - Coup Attempt" Talk-Page (November 25, 2020)

  • Comment - WOW - most "opposes" above seem to be wishful thinking (and/or unrealistic thinking) re the current very non-traditional WH administration - and seem to be presenting an attempted coup (or attempted "legislative coup" or "self-coup" or "power grab" or "refusal to give up power" or "democratic backsliding") as a moot (or irrevelant) point (since the GSA is now permitting the newly elected administration to proceed) - seems an attempted coup ("testing-the-waters", so-to-speak), based on numerous WP:RS references (see listing above for some), that's seemingly failed (so far), is still an attempted coup (or the like) that may still be ongoing (and/or underway) in the WH - and, at least, may need special noting in Wikipedia - via of its own article - after all - there has been - to date => no actual concession from top WH leaders; an unexplained shuffling of top leadership at agencies, including the Pentagon; no official acknowledgement of the newly elected administration from top leaders of the opposing party; numerous WH tweets broadcasting an alternative narrative to millions - and there's a lot of days to go before January 20th, 2021 - in any case - hope this helps in some way - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
ADD => FWIW - This apparent attempt (so far) all seems remarkedly consistent (imo) with my own published (somewhat prescient?) NYTimes Comments some years ago, in 2013.[1] - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:11, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Bogdan, Dennis (April 26, 2013). "Comment - USA: More Valuable Than Money?". The New York Times. Archived from the original on October 3, 2015. Retrieved November 29, 2020.

"The Strangerers"[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TV2000-The Strangerers-Poster.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

"Post-1932 politics" notice[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svgThis is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Just a standard note for the topic area. PackMecEng (talk) 21:10, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

"Coronavirus disease 2019" notice[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svgThis is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Alexbrn (talk) 14:08, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Space Barnstar Hires.png The Space Barnstar
For your tireless contributions to updating astronomy and science articles! Nrco0e (talk · contribs) 05:56, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
@Nrco0e: Wow! - Thank you *very much* for *The Space Barnstar* - It's *greatly* appreciated - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:01, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

"2020 American self-coup attempt" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 2020 American self-coup attempt. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 16#2020 American self-coup attempt until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

"Tabby's Star plot"[edit]

Dennis, I'd like your thoughts on an updated WTF plot ( File:KIC 8462852 dip minima 2965x1900 72dpi.jpg ) which I have just uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and perhaps to replace our current "linear" plot ??? And I'm not taking all the credit for myself -- both you and User:Renerpho have made significant contributions !!! But I think the bottom line is that this plot will "add more fuel to the fire" as reflecting an apparent periodicity !!! So feel free to post if you think OK -- you can do in 15 minutes what would take me 6 hours !!! Synchronist (talk) 05:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

and not to mention[edit]

And not to mention that this plot will put the focus where it needs to be: on October 2021 !!! Synchronist (talk) 06:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Synchronist: and others - Thank you for your comments - and recent efforts with your noted graph - interesting - seems *entirely* ok with me at the moment - Thanks again - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Dennis, I've realized that I forgot to cite Gary Sacco (Sacco 2017) in respect to a possible October 2021 event, so will be updating the .jpg today. Synchronist (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
OK, I've added a corrected .png version of the file to Wikimedia Commons ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:KIC_8462852_dip_minima_2965x1900_72dpi.png ), but haven't yet deleted the .jpg version. Also, I've invited Renerpho to have a look, at to post to the Tabby's Star article if he thinks OK. And thanks for your own favorable review!!! Synchronist (talk) 19:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

"Rainbow on Mars" – "Lens Flare"[edit]

This just in from the Venusian homeworld

Thank you for uploading the rainbow on Mars image. Am looking at it as similar to Earthrise and The Blue Marble in terms of humans connecting with another world through the unexpected familiar. With just a little more information (water vapour?) and a couple of sources this photo should have its own page (would suggest the title "Rainbow on Mars" unless NASA names it). Randy Kryn (talk) 02:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: Hello Randy - Thank you for your comments - and suggestion - yes - *entirely* agree - a "Rainbow on Mars" article seems indicated - however - I'm a bit busy with a number of other projects at the moment - but - Thanks again for your comments and all - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 02:38, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 Done, I put up a redirect to the rover but will work up a stub if a couple sources appear (haven't looked as yet). Randy Kryn (talk) 02:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Looks like NASA now saying it's a lens flare and not a rainbow (haven't read the twitter message NASA supposedly put up). Is there no gold at the end of this rainbow? Good while it lasted though, I guess it was very widely discussed and reported as a rainbow. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: Thank you *very much* for your recent comments - yes - seems official[1][2] - the "Rainbow on Mars" is just a "lens flare" apparently - guess we'll have to wait for a real one (NASA claims it may not be possible on Mars; although seemingly possible on Titan, a moon of Saturn)[1][3] - clean-up of the "Rainbow on Mars" edits seems indicated of course - in any case - Thanks again for your comments and all - yes - good while it lasted - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Will release the new song "Somewhere, over the lens flair". Fun while it lasted though. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for putting up the lens flare link, went there and added the image. An actual notable lens flair, so maybe a well-sourced article (Rainbow on Mars, now in quotes) could survive in main space. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ a b NASAPersevere (7 April 2021). "Twitter Tweet: Rainbow On Mars - No, A Lens Flare". NASA. Retrieved 7 April 2021.
  2. ^ Wall, Mike (7 April 2021). "No, the Perseverance rover didn't spot a rainbow on Mars". Space.com. Retrieved 7 April 2021.
  3. ^ Science@NASA (25 February 2005). "Rainbows on Titan". NASA. Archived from the original on 25 November 2008. Retrieved 7 April 2021.

"Film: Infinity Chamber"[edit]

The original Chamber article was a festering blob of copyvio; once that was removed, it was a single sentence.

If you can write something legitimate, go ahead. DS (talk) 02:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@DragonflySixtyseven: Thank you - created the Infinity Chamber article - at least for starters - Thanks again - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
The 'Somnio' article pertained to an American company which did not meet notability requirements; there's no problem with using it as a redirect. DS (talk) 17:26, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

"Abiogenesis"[edit]

You have removed a paragraph on scientific criticism of the current hypotheses on abiogenesis. The reason you gave was that the paragraph was not sufficiently supported by sources. Since half of the paragraph is a verbatim quote, I would ask you to read the source cited before deleting it and to seek dialogue first. Thanks and best regards Joe Sloppy (talk) (contribs) 11:11, 4 May 2021‎ (UTC)

Thank you for your comments re the Abiogenesis article - added => "Rv undiscussed edits - as before - please discuss this first on the talk-page for WP:CONSENSUS - per WP:BRD, WP:CITE, WP:NOR & related - thanks." - seems agreement first by other editors for this significant edit addition would be helpful at the moment - please understand that this is a standard procedure for some significant edits similar to your own - in any case - Thanks again for your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I am not convinced by the practice that is applied here. I have asked several times for you to specify your problems with the section. What exactly is it? Is the citation insufficient? If so, I would ask you to explain this in more detail, since, as I said, it is mainly a verbatim quotation from a book publication from the Springer Verlag (https://www.springer.com/gp). The talk page says: "It is against Wikipedia policy for views without scientific support, such as all known objections to abiogenesis, to be included in a science article like Abiogenesis." Does this also apply to scientific critical receptions of hypotheses of abiogenesis? Best regards, Joe Joe Sloppy (talk) (contribs) 10:37, 5 May 2021‎ (UTC)

@Joe Sloppy: - Thank you for your comments - Please see my reply comments on the "Abiogenesis" talk-page at the following link => "Talk:Abiogenesis#Criticism on abiogenesis" - Thanks - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:39, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

"Escape mutation" redirects[edit]

We have an article on Antigenic escape, which is the correct target for those redirects. Maybe you could add a short section on SARS-CoV-2? Fences&Windows 23:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Fences and windows: Thank you for your comments - and suggestions - added (for now at least) => { {also|Variants of SARS-CoV-2}} to the "Antigenic escape" page and { {also|Antigenic escape|Escape mutation}} to the "Variants of SARS-CoV-2" page - hope this helps in some way - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

"ScienceFacts"[edit]

In User:Drbogdan/ScienceFacts, it says, Insight, Curiosity, and Perseverance are currently operating on Mars. But what about the Ingenuity helicopter? StarshipSLS (Talk), (My Contributions) 18:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done @StarshipSLS: Thank you *very much* for your comments - and suggesting including the "Ingenuity helicopter" on Mars to the "User:Drbogdan/ScienceFacts" template - no problem whatsoever - updated the template, and all now should be ok - please let me know if otherwise of course - Thanks again for your help with this - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 19:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@Drbogdan: You welcome. StarshipSLS (Talk), (My Contributions) 20:37, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

"Mars image of 'moon in June (or at least May)'"[edit]

The Earth and Moon viewed from Mars

Hi, and thanks again for all of the good work at the Mars 2020 pages. Came across an upload of yours and, being personally noncomputertechsavvy enough to do it myself, am wondering if it's possible to uppercase 'Moon' on this NASA graphic (where NASA gets it wrong again). Just to keep Wikipedia consistency on uppercasing proper astronomical names. Thanks, and happy flights. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:43, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Randy Kryn: Hello Randy - Thank You for your comments - and suggestion - yes - seems NASA could have presented this image better with "Moon" (instead of "moon") - after all => "Capitalize “Moon” when referring to Earth’s Moon" (from the NASA Style Guide) - to be clear, this was originally from NASA at => https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/figures/PIA17936_fig2.jpg - nonetheless - I tried to adjust the image with "M" - may not be a perfect effort (somewhat new to this), but maybe an improvement - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Thanks again - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Wow, nice work. I can't begin to imagine how to do coding things like that. The Moon shines anew in the Martian sky. I don't know why sources like Scientific American still lowercase names like 'moon' and 'sun' (not very scientific, and maybe not even American!). Randy Kryn (talk) 17:22, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
@Randy Kryn: Thanks for your comments - used an oldie (but goodie) program ("PaintShop Pro v6.02") - ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PaintShop_Pro ) => brushed-out the old "m" on the image after detecting background color with the "dropper" tool - then used "text" tool (set for "M" using "white" color and "Arial" font) - on the resulting image - then oriented the new "M" font on the image - saved new image file - and then uploaded the new image file to Commons as usual - hope this helps - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 17:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
All Greek to me (a term of cultural appropriation, fine me ten Wikipedia dollars). I've never even uploaded an image here. Thanks again, the finished image looks good. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:02, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

"USA News: Political Cult - My Comments"[edit]

FWIW - seems relevant here as well - should be *entirely* ok of course - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 16:45, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Copied from the "Viriditus – Political Cult" Talk-Page (May 23, 2021)

  • FWIW - seems relevant - Yes - the Republican Party may now be a cult[1] - but to what end? - following the money (cui bono?) - may be behind much of this imo - although the ball may be hidden - via theatrics, ploys and whatnot - after all - just 400 people have more wealth than half of all Americans combined[2] - an historic 2017 tax cut "heist" largely benefits this ultra-rich group of people afaik[3] - and represents a "non-negotiable red line" to Republicans re negotiations[4] - all in all - a way of maintaining an "american aristocracy" of ultra-rich people? - at the expense of tax payers? - a return to a "plantation economy"? - updated to modern times - and modern dress - develop a following - promote a cult - denounce democracy[5] - seems my 2013 NYT comments may be especially relevant[6] - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 00:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Harwood, John (May 23, 2021). "Dismissed in 2012, this diagnosis of GOP ills has now become undeniable". CNN News. Retrieved May 23, 2021.
  2. ^ Kertscher, Tom (May 10, 2011). "Just 400 Americans -- 400 -- have more wealth than half of all Americans combined". Politico. Retrieved May 22, 2021.
  3. ^ The Editorial Board (December 2, 2017). "A Historic Tax Heist". The New York Times. Retrieved May 22, 2021.
  4. ^ Benen, Steve (May 3, 2021). "Why it matters that McConnell refuses to touch Trump-era tax cuts". MSNBC-News. Retrieved May 22, 2021.
  5. ^ Rampell, Catherine (May 17, 2021). "Opinion: Almost half of Republicans admit they're ready to ditch democracy". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 22, 2021.
  6. ^ Bogdan, Dennis (April 26, 2013). "Comment - USA: More Valuable Than Money?". The New York Times. Archived from the original on October 3, 2015. Retrieved May 22, 2021.
Hands-Clapping.jpgNow, that's just what the doctor ordered! Viriditas

"Origin of COVID-19"[edit]

NOTE: Current related discussion at "WP:RSN" => "Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 344#Lab Leak Again"
Related recent references[1][2] re the possible "origin of the Covid-19 virus", including my own related published NYT comments (6 July 2020)[3] - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:53, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

References

"Ingenuity - date of 6th flight"[edit]

Hello Drbogdan, can you support me getting the correct UTC date of the sixth ingenuity flight? I'm a little concerned that nobody is supporting me. Are my arguments not comprehensible? --Schrauber5 (talk) 12:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

@Schrauber5: - Thank you for your comments - and question - seems a "WP:Reliable source" supporting the correct UTC dating may be best afaik at the moment - hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
I agree that a reliable source would be the cleanest way to resolved it. But even if there is a NASA publication of the correct date (which is already there, see date given at https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020/multimedia/raw-images/HNM_0091_0675019235_723ECM_N0060001HELI04636_0000A0J ) there are 20 reliable newspapers still having May 22. My question was, if you find my arguments comprehesible? I'm wondering if the missing support is based on nobody is interessed in having the correct UTC date or nobody agrees with the correct date being May 23 UTC or even that shifting to UTC date and time is original research. --14:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
@Schrauber5: - My thinking continues to be the same as above - cite the best available WP:RS at the moment - or - nothing at all until there is one - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 15:04, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

"Template:Human timeline"[edit]

Hi, you introduced a div-span-flip error with your changes to Template:Human timeline today. All the pages it links to are now appearing in the WP:LINT filter Miscellaneous issues And I'm not seeing what needs to be adjusted to correct this issue. I thought you'd appreciate this message more than me attempting to tinker with it. Zinnober9 (talk) 20:50, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Zinnober9, Hike395, and Jonesey95: (and others) - Thank you *very much* for your post re the "WP:Lint" issue - at the moment, I have no idea whatsoever how to solve this problem (I'm a "newbie" with much of the template coding) - any help solving this template problem would be *greatly* appreciated - Thanks in advance for your help with this - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 21:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

NOTE: Copied from Wikipedia talk:Linter#"Template:Human timeline"

Fixed. I had to swap two nested templates. In short, {{font}} uses span tags, and {{Vertical text}} uses div tags. Div tags don't like to be inside of span tags. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:48, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thank you @Jonesey95: Thank you *very, very* much for your help with this linter error - lesson learned - Thanks again - your help is *greatly* appreciated - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 00:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

"Template:Perseverance Mission Timer"[edit]

Hi, there is a discrepancy of 9 minutes between the sol switch of the template created by you Perseverance_Mission_Timer and my templates e.g. Sol: 176.857 Mars time: 20:34:30

Is the claim of your template to have the sol switch with minute accuracy? Schrauber5 (talk) 07:53, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Schrauber5: - Thank you for your comments - I'm somewhat new to this - you may have a good solution - Thanks again for your comments - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 16:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

At Sol 0 0:00 in the docu of the template, there is UT 2021-02-18 13:50 given, in the code 4:53, and I think that 4:44 is correct (based on published Earth and Mars time of ingenuity flight 5). Schrauber5 (talk) 06:11, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

"Generic object of dark energy"[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Generic object of dark energy 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/Generic object of dark energy 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.

LaundryPizza03 (d) 20:35, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

"USA News: The Big Lie Makes Big Money? - My Comments"[edit]

FWIW - seems relevant here as well - should be *entirely* ok of course - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 16:08, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Copied from "Talk:Big lie#The Big Lie Makes Big Money?": (July 31, 2021)

Also, Copied to "Talk:Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election#The Big Lie Makes Big Money?":
(as a further way of attempting to overturn the 2020 USA presidential election - and, possibly, future USA presidential elections as well)

Also, Copied to "Talk:Veracity of statements by Donald Trump#The Big Lie Makes Big Money?":
(as another instance of being less-than-truthful - and to make a lot of money)


Should this very recent New York Times news report[1] be added, in some way, to the "The Big Lie" article - as perhaps another reason, besides pursuing political power, in the near term and/or later, to continue promoting "The Big Lie"? - Comments Welcome - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:59, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Drbogdan: The NYT source is not directly related to the topic of the article. And WP:OR says: "To demonstrate that you are not adding original research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented." --Renat 14:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
@RenatUK: (and others) - Thank you for your comments - yes - *entirely* agree - more direct WP:RS may be helpful re the issue - several such direct references may include The New York Times,[2][3] NBC News[4] and Yahoo News[5] - there may be more direct references (perhaps many more) - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:34, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE: Besides making Big Money from The Big Lie during the current go-round in 2020-2021[1][2][3][4][5] - others are funding the Big Lie with their own Big Money[6] - all in all - Money seems to be a very Big Part of the Big Lie - in one form or another - and, perhaps, should be part of The Big Lie article? - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 14:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Drbogdan, this all seems to be very directly related to the subject. -- Valjean (talk) 23:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm wondering if this Trump/GOP angle on the subject deserves its own article? I suspect that some objections to the section in this article are related to WP:COATRACK, and by folding this section and some content from two other articles (Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election and Republican reactions to Donald Trump's claims of 2020 election fraud) into a meta-article entitled Big Lie (Trump/GOP), we'd have a legitimate and good-sized article. There are likely other possible ways to merge this content, but I feel it needs to be done. The final title can be discussed.
This matter is taking on greater importance as the lie that may succeed in destroying American democracy and American's confidence in their own elections (Putin giggles with glee...). Rs coverage is growing, so it's certainly DUE. What do you think of that idea? Then this article and the Veracity of statements by Donald Trump article would just mention and link to that article. We simply can't do the subject justice here. -- Valjean (talk) 00:17, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Valjean: (and others) - Thank you *very much* for your comments - and suggestion - yes - *completely* agree with considering a newly created article re this and related material - perhaps overdue since this may have been going on for some time I would think - flexible with article title, layout and content - your suggested title "Big Lie (Trump/GOP)" may be a good start - could always be changed later - you're more than welcome to use my own related content/references here (and perhaps elsewhere) for the article if you like - in any case - Thanks again for your comments and all - Stay Safe and Healthy! - Drbogdan (talk) 00:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ a b Goldmacher, Shane; Shorey, Rachel (31 July 2021). "Trump Raised $56 Million Online in First Half of 2021 - The former president raised far more money online than any other Republican, federal records show, and more than each of the three main fund-raising arms of the Republican Party itself". The New York Times. Retrieved 31 July 2021.
  2. ^ a b Goldmacher, Shane; Shorey, Rachel (17 April 2021). "Trump's Sleight of Hand: Shouting Fraud, Pocketing Donors' Cash for Future - With breathless, often misleading appeals, the former president promised small donors that he was using the money to fight the election results, but in fact stored much of it for future use". The New York Times. Retrieved 31 July 2021.
  3. ^ a b Goldmacher, Shane; Shorey, Rachel (31 January 2021). "Trump Raised $255.4 Million in 8 Weeks as He Sought to Overturn Election Result - The former president's fund-raising slowed significantly after the Electoral College delivered its votes to make Joseph R. Biden Jr. the 46th president". The New York Times. Retrieved 31 July 2021.
  4. ^ a b Smith, Allan (24 March 2021). "Capitol riot suspects ramped up donations to Trump after his election defeat - An NBC News analysis of Federal Election Commission filings found that people alleged to be rioters upped their contributions after Election Day". NBC News. Retrieved 31 July 2021.
  5. ^ a b Zahn, Max; Serwer, Andy (31 March 2021). "Ken Burns: People are making lots of money off 'the big lie' of US election fraud". Yahoo News. Retrieved 31 July 2021.
  6. ^ Mayer, Jane (2 August 2021). "The Big Money Behind the Big Lie - Donald Trump's attacks on democracy are being promoted by rich and powerful conservative groups that are determined to win at all costs". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2 August 2021.

"L 98-59"[edit]

See also: list of exoplanets discovered in 2019. LL&P. Viriditas (talk) 08:22, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@Viriditas: Thank you *very much* for sharing the links re "L 98-59" - very interesting of course - although less surprising, perhaps, when one considers that such "Earth-like planets" may be more numerous in the "observable universe" than all the "grains of sand on all our beaches", according to at least one news report => "There may be more Earth-like planets than grains of sand on all our beaches - New research contends that the Milky Way alone is flush with billions of potentially habitable planets -- and that's just one sliver of the universe." (CNET) - in any case - Thanks for the links and all - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:39, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
"It's the least massive exoplanet ever measured by examining its gravitational effect on the position of the star." Viriditas (talk) 14:50, 6 August 2021 (UTC)