Welcome!

Hello TestPilot, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  - UtherSRG (talk) 23:56, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I switched the name of the article to wet bow, but the content is the same. Does this help? TomStar81 04:06, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!!! TestPilot 04:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Found a picture to help illistrate the article. TomStar81 00:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please keep the three-revert rule in mind when editing this article. —Kirill Lokshin 18:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks. I did 3 rv in last 24h. Three is not more than 3. So evrything fine. Happy New Year!TestPilot 18:55, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the major complaint he had was citing a source for the information; I have since found a quote for that. Additionally, I believe it was him that inserted the retooled Iowa-Yamato-Vanguard line; I do not see that the issue will flare up again tomarrow, but as I said I will keep an eye out on it just to be safe. I am sure that the other users (yourself included) will also be keeping an eye on it. PS: Happy New Year! TomStar81 01:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I think its fine the way it is. He is probably trying to keep the article under 30kb, since anything over that tends to conflict with article length policies. Tightening the article like that also helps elimante what could be called excessive wording, which can get articles in trouble as well. In all likelyhood its probably just as well that it was tightned, with all the complaints on that page already and an edit war just recently (sort of) resolved we don't need people to complain about the length too. TomStar81 02:20, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - I didn;t reply to your comment a couple of weeks ago. Having checked the edit history, the text regarding Yamato and Vanguard was in the article before I started editing it. I think it is right, by the way. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will look into it when I get some free time, probably over this weekend. At the moment I have to study for an upcoming astronomy test (bummer). TomStar81 00:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you could give me the name of the article and where you want to move it, I can probably figure things out for you; without that, I'm sort of left guessing as to which one you mean ;-) —Kirill Lokshin 01:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All done! —Kirill Lokshin 02:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, those look like dynamic IPs from Bell Canada, so we can't block them for long periods of time. It's probably best to just keep removing the spam, unless he gets really disruptive. —Kirill Lokshin 19:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week {{subst:IDRIVEtopic article}} was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

I wanted to thank my few "yes voters" in person...well, not in person, but at least contact you directly. Thank you for your vote. It is appreciated. I love you.

Rowlan 16:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked him for 24 hours. He seems to have done this sort of thing before, though, given some of the comments on his talk page. —Kirill Lokshin 04:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UtherSRG (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I hate to be a spoil sport, but this image has a non-free license, and is used under fairuse. Sadly, that means it can't used outside of an article, so you can't use it as a signature, but I'm sure there are similiar free images available. --Rob 06:12, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. I look into that. Thanx. TestPilot 06:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion has begun on how to handle an official election for replacing the Main Page. To ensure it is set up sensibly and according to consensus, your input is needed there. --Go for it! 23:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you asked for the AfD records of the Neanderthal theory of the autism spectrum article. There are four:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neanderthal theory of autism
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Neanderthal theory of the autism spectrum
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neanderthal theory of the autism spectrum
• Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neanderthal_theory_of_autism_3

Q0 08:19, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Great Leap Forward and Decline of the Roman Empire were selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help…

-Litefantastic 00:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could I ask your assistance? The anti-israel people are trying to delete the article about me on Wikipedia. They ahve lied and say i do not appear on google but in fact am the Lee kaplan who appears most. They also may try and post another smear article on Indymedia called Lee Kaplan, DAFKA exposed which has been running on Indymedia. That article was put under Front Page Magazine to smear me there but I wrote Jimbo Wales and threatened to sue for libel and it was removed underadvice of his attorney, ergo it should not be permitted in the bio/profile on me in the future or at any time. Your bio here says you support ISrael so you understand the lies and smears against me and I'd appreciate your support and help.

Thanks.

Thanks for uploading Image:Hubble's Sharpest View of the Orion Nebula.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The address appears to be a dynamic IP assigned to some commercial ISP in the United Arab Emirates (and looking through the contributions seems to confirm this, as the editing patterns are very different on different days); blocking it after the fact would be pretty useless, as the person who has it tomorrow is quite unlikely to be the one who had it today. Kirill Lokshin 03:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, of course the talk page is all about vandalism; does anyone leave messages for anons that aren't warnings? ;-)

More practically, though, I'm fairly certain the IP is dynamic—there are a number of obviously different editing (and vandalism) styles used—and the overall level of vandalism is so small (limited to about a dozen edits per day, at most, which really isn't much by overall Wikipedia standards) that I can't really justify a long-term block at this point. There are some useful edits coming through there, after all, and it would be a shame to lose those. If the more egregious vandalism (e.g. the number swaps) continues, we can come back to this issue and consider a long-term block; but, for the moment, I think it's not a particularly pressing issue, since the "clever" vandalism appears to have been an isolated incident. Kirill Lokshin 04:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's discuss this.

• The material you keep adding to Procambarus alleni is almost entirely dedicated to pet care, which explicitly falls outside the remit of the encyclopædia.
• It is unencyclopædically written. Anything that states what should be done is not encyclopædic, for instance. Similarly, phrases like "excellent scavengers", "not really very good predators", "It can be quite amazing to see" and "They often get a bad rap" do not belong in an encyclopædia.
• It is completely unreferenced.
• The core of the article must be about the species in the wild. The only exceptions to this are animals which are chiefly or exclusively kept as pets. This applies to the domestic dog, but not to Procambarus alleni. That the species is also cometimes kept as a pet is worth mentioning (and is mentioned in my version), but it is of peripheral importance. Compare White's Tree Frog, where its status as a pet is given a short paragraph near the end, despite its popularity as a pet.
• Also some smaller points: arthropod names are not capitalised on Wikipedia, and there is no need to include trade mark symbols. A trade mark is a trade mark whether or not it is explicitly marked as such. I also have some concern that the article might be being used as an advertisement for a commercial product; it's only a vague concern at the moment, but any time when proprietary names (such as "Electric Blue Dragon™ Crayfish") are given undue prominence, it sets alarm bells ringing.

Sorry to be so scathing, but I wanted to get my point across. I think there probably is some useful information in the added text, but it is overwhelmed by material that is simply inappropriate. I welcome any attempt to improve the crustacean articles, but repeated reversions without any discussion is generally not a productive gambit. --Stemonitis 15:00, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is unencyclopædically written - I will look into that and will try to fix that. Yes, I agree there a lot should be fixed/cleaned up including phrases like "excellent scavengers", "not really very good predators", "It can be quite amazing to see" and "They often get a bad rap"

The core of the article must be about the species in the wild - yes, I tottaly agree, core should be written and expanded.

when proprietary names (such as "Electric Blue Dragon™ Crayfish") are given be bold and fix it:) Or, i'll will remove it. TestPilot 15:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, We appreciate your enthusiasm, but you are making a lot of edits with AWB that are considered 'insignificat', ie whitespace moves and similar

Consider using RegExTypo with edits, and limiting AWB to preforming edits that change spelling mistakes and such

Thanks

Reedy Boy 14:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Neandertals48.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:36, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Pluto was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

Davodd 20:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote a brief primer... Hope you like it.... Kjaergaard 21:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some references are missing there, here there are some

Reduction, Denaturation and Refolding of Rnase A In Vitro: Sela, M., F. H. White Jr, and C. B. Anfinsen. “Reductive Cleavage of Disulfide Bridges in Ribonuclease.” Science 125 (1957): 691-692.

White, Frederick H. “Regeneration of Native Secondary and Tertiary Structures by Air Oxidation of Reduced Ribonuclease.” J. Biol. Chem 236 (1961): 1353-1360. Anfinsen, C. B., and Edgar Haber. “Studies on the Reduction and Re-formation of Protein Disulfide Bonds.” J. Biol. Chem 236 (1960): 1361-1363.

Anfinsen, C. B., E. Haber, M. Sela, and F. H. White Jr. “The Kinetics of Formation of Native Ribonuculease During Oxidation of the Reduced Polypeptide Chain.” PNAS 47 (1961): 1309-1314.

Anfinsen, C. B. “Principles that Govern the Folding of Protein Chains.” Science 181 (1973): 223-230.

Moore, Stanford, and William H. Stein. “Chemical Structures of Pancreatic Ribonuclease and Deoxyribonuclease.” Science 180 (1973): 458-464. nesanfor 00:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Could you please cite a reference for the claim that my addition was wrong? I provided a source for my statements, which verified everything I said. If you know of a source which contradicts it, please tell me. Serendipodous 02:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TestPilot. "Frühinflammatorisch" is composed of "früh", that is "early", and "inflammatorisch", another word for "entzündlich" (in the medical sense, not the fire), that means inflamed, becoming ill by bacterias or germs. So "In der frühinflammatorischen Phase" means "in the early phase of inflammation". I hope I could help you. Sorry for the late reply, but I am not in en-wiki so often.

P.S. the main author of TLR-2 in de-wiki is Ossip groth. Maybe you want to contact him as TLR-2 is the translation of his article. His user page is: Benutzer:Ossip groth. --Adbo2009 00:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thank you for your interest in Siberian wikipedia. The vote page is protected only for new accounts. So after several days after registering the account you will be able to vote.

Yaroslav. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.68.146.96 (talk) 01:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Hello, you can vote in the discusssion page (as several ukrainians do). Later I will transfer the vote to the real voting. --62.68.146.96 03:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Has no-one awarded you a barnstar yet?

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		TestPilot, for numerous contributions to articles. Axl 10:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TestPilot. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Boeing 747-8I Large.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:TestPilot. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 06:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I undid your deletion of Bird article about "an alternate theory". It referenced, but sounds somewhat suspicious. Could you please explain why you deleted it? Curious:) TestPilot 01:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(How do I respond to comments on my discussion page?)

There is no more validity to the alternate theory of bird evolution than there is to the idea that the earth is flat not a sphere. It is impossible to hold a scientific theory of other origins for birds.

For reasons that no serious bird palentologist understands they still have to deal with this all the time. I wish I could fix this bird myth easily without having to write notes and provide references. I thought I would give it a shot and see how long it took for that to be restored.

I will take a moment here to say that at the meeting of the national association of bird palentologists in 1990 there was a complete session (with a dozen papers) discussing why they still had to refute the alternate hypothesis when it was so absolutely certain that birds are decended from dinosaurs.

Since then dinosaur fossils have been found with feathers.

Nwbeeson 01:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the theory of dinosaur orgin of birds is correct but please discuss this at the bird talk page. Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop vandalising the Periodic Table article, thanks.--feline1 11:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC) If you actually *read* the "History of the Periodic Table" section/sub-article, you'll see it contradicts your edit to the summaries. This is as plain as day. Newland's octaves are of course acknowledged in there as precursors.--feline1 11:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And who is mentioning vandalism? The guy who got multiple blocks(and a lot of them!) for violation of different Wikipedia policies, including personal attacks and VANDALISM? I never even had warning, not mentioning multiple BLOCKS! And now you are trying to start what looks like an edit war, with first thing you did is claiming opponents edits vandalism. Cmon, Wikipedia is about facts and verifiability. Source your claims, try to stick with fact, go into discussion. But you not interested in that, cuz you a not about facts, you come here to promote your POV. And yes, first thing calling someone who you disagree with vandal is not a best or most effective way to reach consensus. TestPilot 13:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. In case you need to discuss article itself - please use talk page.

I marked it *vandlism* cos I have already reverted this edit several times during the past year, and every time made it clear in the edit comment that the claim you are make is contradicted by the very article itself, and yet you keep reverting without comment or discussion. It does not need to be discussed on the article's talk page, because all the verifable evidence refuting your edit is already present in the article! --feline1 15:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

unfortunately it apears that Downtrip has resumed his previous trends and resorted to sockpuppetry as a means to go against consensus. A earlier Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Wikzilla had shown him to use socks and it seems he is doing so again. As such I have filed a new complaint at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Downtrip once the request is listed I would sugest you share your input till then take care.Freepsbane (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to my talk page if you have any coments.Freepsbane (talk) 22:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; glad you liked it. It's a real chore separating the fact from the internet-forum-speculation on Chinese and Iranian projects. For some reason these articles become real fanboi magnets. And thanks to you for jumping in with the actual JDW reference that made the rewrite possible! --Rlandmann (talk) 07:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:H_rover-comp_wheels_02.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 01:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you check what you're editing before pressing 'save'?[1]. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 06:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you check your edits before pressing 'save'? Apparently no. Careful - such blanketing could be considered WP:Vandalism. And that was your last edit before writing on my talk page. TestPilot 08:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You recently edited meme using AWB. This edit "corrected" an author's last name to a similarly spelled word. Please check your edits carefully before saving, and keep in mind that "edits made using this software [AWB] are the responsibility of the editor using it." - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 18:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, while your contributions are appreciated, you really should have put them in the "New additions" section, where we could find them easier.--BillFlis (talk) 10:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please check your AWB typo list. You just introduced a mistake into Cellulose by turning the perfectly fine word "synthases" into "syntheses", which is wrong in the context. Cheers, AxelBoldt (talk) 18:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re this edit. What's "synthasis" mean? Google couldn't define it for me. Thanks, -- JHunterJ (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, "synthase" is a noun, with "synthases" as a plural, but "synthasis" does not appear to be a word. I'll work on the Typo entry. -- JHunterJ (talk) 19:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been mildly interested in all the machinations of the survey campaigning but now that a number of admins have been active and also been scrupulous in their scrutiny of the voting, I will ask the dissenting editors for their opinion on establishing a consensus and ending this survey for opinion. Remember that a consensus is not a strict adherence to a majority vote but an acceptance by all parties in a decision. With this proviso in mind, I will now cast a vote for Support with the disclaimer that Akinkhoo has recommended. FWIW, the normal period for establishing a consensus on a disputed issue is a week but due to the extraordinary circumstances engendered in this survey, the deadline was extended to allow other participants to register their vote. Since you cast a vote for both Support and Oppose, I assume you would accept a consensus decision for Support but please register your vote clearly at the associated talk page. Bzuk (talk) 13:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Twice now you've edited this page with an edit summary of "test, typos fixed: antarctica → Antarctica using AWB". On neither occasion was the capitalization of Antarctica changed, and both times resulted in a loss of formatting inside the tables. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. On re-examination the table formatting was not disrupted this time. (and have reverted myself accordingly) However, why the "Antarctica" in the edit history? --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the aid. As you likely know Downtrip was blocked for Sockpuppetry and subsequently went on a tantrum driven spree of vandalism (Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Wikzilla) (Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Downtrip) some of his socks like Sfgerdy are still out. A vigilant watch is likely the best countermeasure to Downtrip/Wikizila socks as they surface. Freepsbane (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again TestPilot. I've just taken a look at the sequence of edits, and to me it looks like a simple case of the two of you inadvertently getting in one another's way. The message that BillCJ left on your talk page is simply a templated warning to alert a user that if they continue in the direction they're headed that they might end up violating the 3RR rule. It doesn't mean that he thought you already had made 3 reversions.

You can see the template ("uw-3rr1") here - it escalates to this and this before this final template warns the user that they have now exceeded the 3RR.

I see that Bill has already removed the warning from this talk page. But - you were well within your rights to remove it yourself if you had wanted to - you don't need "permission" from anybody to do so.

Hope the two of you can put this behind you. Cheers --Rlandmann (talk) 09:46, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]