| Revision as of 03:24, 22 June 2012 editMy very best wishes (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users56,578 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:59, 22 June 2012 edit undoMy very best wishes (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users56,578 edits No more disputes. I am not reading this page.Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{retired}} | |||
| == Protein familes == | |||
| Hi! ] pointed me in the direction of your page. There are a large number of automatically generated pages for protein familes linked on ]. Please feel free to create new pages from any that interest you, or to use the content in these pages to improve existing pages. If you edit these pages to indicate which you have done, and also let me know which you have worked on, then this would be a great help. Many thanks --] (]) 11:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Great! I will make a list of my changes and place it with other technical comments on your talk page. ] (]) 15:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| I think for those families which form part of a multi-protein complex we should consider each case on an individual basis. With some a separate artcle for each subunit may be appropriate, with others one article could describe the whole complex. As you say, we need to follow the guidelines for notability here. If an article about a whole complex becomes too large it can always be split at a later date. Thank you for tidying the infoboxes on ], this seems like a good solution in this case. On some other pages we may want to go one step further and put them all in an expandable bit at the bottom (sorry, I don't know the technical term for this!) as I have done in ]. In this article I felt there was nothing to be gained by having the infoboxes readily visible, but the information is there should people wish to see it. | |||
| I'm going to take a closer look at PF10409 (C2) as it may be that I can improve the Pfam family. I think in general fo clan members it would be ideal to have a page for the clan/superfamily and link from this to articles for the individual families. However, there will be cases where there is not sufficient information readily available to do this. --] (]) 12:59, 6 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :All right, let's do it on the case to case basis. I agree with your solution in ]. Alex simply forget to include PF10409 to appropriate clan (compare to ). ''These'' C2 domains are the same superfamily or possibly even from the same family - this is rather arbitrary (do not mix them with . Almost forget, the ]... I agree with removal of the boxes. However, we need to keep some text for individual families per ]. ] (]) 17:59, 6 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::I have now added PF10409 to the C2 clan. Sorry for the delay on this - I've been pretty busy lately. Your work with the protein family pages is really appreciated. Thank you. --] (]) 09:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::My pleasure. I will work more with protein families, bioinformatics and molecular modeling pages, as time allows. Right now I am quite busy with my "original research". ] (]) 14:07, 13 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I am currently looking at the families which you suggested should be in clans. This will take some time! I am also going to try to build a new family from CarnocyclinA. We'd really appreciate it if you could email any such suggestions for new families, clans or any other changes to pfam-help@sanger.ac.uk - this way we can keep track of requests easily which may become lost or overlooked on my talk page. Many thanks --] (]) 11:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Yes, absolutely. Be prepared for a long list. The determining superfamilies/clans is a very complicated business even if you know 3D structures. As Murzin said, he had to be very "conservative" in deciding which protein families are evolutionary related (belong to the same "superfamily"), rather than simply have a common "fold" in SCOP. ] (]) 15:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC) Done. ] (]) 19:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Brilliant Idea Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Hi. What you did was a brilliant idea that anyone can understand. ] (]) 22:22, 30 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| Thank you. Do you mean that I stopped commenting on administrative noticeboards? Yes, that was certainly a brilliant idea. Speaking more seriously, I now understand much better the system (who is who and who is doing what on wiki). You know three rules of Gulag prisoners: Ne ver', ne boisja, ne prosi ("Do not trust, do not fear, and do not beg"). There are also three don'ts of wikiediting. I would call them: ], ] and, most importantly, ]. Happy editing, ] (]) 14:20, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Some stroopwafels for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Your username is an ambassador for ]! Cheers - ] (]) 13:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| == Membrane topology == | |||
| My very best wishes, I don't understand why you deleted a section with no obvious problems from ]. ] (]) 21:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :This is very basic and important subject, but it was so poorly described that I thought it would be easier to rewrite from scratch.] (]) 02:59, 18 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Fair enough. And welcome back! Sorry you were having troubles last time. ] (]) 04:55, 18 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Main trouble is that I simply do not have time. A lot of articles in this area are in a very poor condition, and there are few to none people to improve them. ] (]) 16:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::A familiar problem! ] (]) 17:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==Just want to say== | |||
| I never read one of your posts without thinking "Best user name evah!" ''] ]'', <small>12:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC).</small><br /> | |||
| :Thank you. It helps. Then I must keep it. And I am sorry for your trouble. ]. If ] could not survive such environment, then who can? ] (]) 13:46, 30 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Force field == | |||
| ] Hi, and thank you for ] to Misplaced Pages. It appears that you recently tried to give ] a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into ]. This is known as a "] move", and it is undesirable because it splits the ], which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Misplaced Pages has a feature that allows pages to be ''moved'' to a new title together with their edit history. | |||
| In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the ] at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a ] from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at ] to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at ]. Thank you. <!-- Template:uw-c&pmove--> | |||
| Also, as per ], it would have been very helpful if you had checked the other Misplaced Pages articles that ] and corrected those links ''before'' moving the disambiguation page. You even left the disambiguation page with a link ''to itself'' that should have been fixed. | |||
| From your apologizing for your lack of time, I guess you knew you weren't doing the right things, but you did them anyway. Just as a reminder, ], so you could have waited until you had time to get it right. --] (] Russ) 11:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Ugh, the "copy-paste" was not a problem, but I did not realize what would happen with links as a result of my first move because this will not be a "REDIRECT". Sorry. Now I have to fix my mess. Will do later. ] (]) 15:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :: Thanks for your efforts. By the way, I do love your user name, too. --] (] Russ) 17:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::On a second thought, there is nothing really wrong with having links to disambig. page from videogames. I would rather spend my time improving Force field (Chemistry). ] (]) 13:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==FG== | |||
| I think there's some ambiguity about the exact parameters of PCPP's topic ban, and different admins may interpret it differently. Clarification was sought, and it seems the understanding is that he can pursue a discussion (which is fine with me, and I presume okay with other involved editors), but if it veers ever so slightly into the territory of the ban, he will be in breach. This is, of course, unrelated to the question of edit warring or other conduct. Thank you for looking out. I hope you know that it's appreciated. Best, ] (]) 05:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :So, this admin first said it ''was'' TB violation , but then the same admin said it ''was not'' TB violation. Well, I just dug a little bit deeper in this FG story and found that it was worse than I previously thought. Whatever. ] (]) 05:10, 14 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yea, and this admin also seemed to think it was possibly a violation prior to that.. No one seems too sure. ] (]) 05:22, 14 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::I am not surprised that administrator changed his opinion. If he would not, that could result in filing a clarification to Arbcom by negotiators, as it was in . Who wants it? In fact, this administrator probably made right decision to minimize disruption caused by PCPP actions. ] (]) 18:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Hello MVBW. Sorry for the rather rough handling, but I undid your reversion of PCPP's recent edits to the ] article. I agree that there is some ambiguity over the scope of the topic ban, but I don't think it is clear enough that we can simply revert anything that he adds. I think the important thing to do here is to get all parties to sit down and talk things out with the assistance of a mediator, and reverting his additions on sight will probably not help this process. As I mentioned in the ], I think that there are problems with ] in the article, and I think this whole situation will be easier to handle, and the article of better quality, if we can recognise this and deal with it. By the way, do you want me to add you to the DRN thread as a party? I think that would be appropriate if you feel strongly about the outcome of the dispute resolution process. Best — ''''']''''' <sup>(])</sup> 09:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks, but no thanks. I do not edit in this area, and I do not want to be involved. I only made a comment on AE and talked with several participants of the arbitration case. It was strange to see so many good content contributors in the state of obvious conflict. Now I have some idea why this is all happening. Good luck with your mediation efforts, ] (]) 14:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| {{cquote|Ships that pass in the night, and speak each other in passing, only a signal shown, and a distant voice in the darkness; So on the ocean of life, we pass and speak one another, only a look and a voice, then darkness again and a silence. (Henry Wadsworth Longfellow)}} | {{cquote|Ships that pass in the night, and speak each other in passing, only a signal shown, and a distant voice in the darkness; So on the ocean of life, we pass and speak one another, only a look and a voice, then darkness again and a silence. (Henry Wadsworth Longfellow)}} | ||
| ::Take care. Hopefully you will be back ;) ] (]) 23:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC) | ::Take care. Hopefully you will be back ;) ] (]) 23:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :I am trying to stop editing here for a long time. There are many reasons for leaving , but main reason is simple: editing on-wiki distracts me from my scientific research, and this is something I can not afford. Good luck in the ocean of life! ] (]) 12:13, 20 June 2012 (UTC) | :I am trying to stop editing here for a long time. There are many reasons for leaving , but main reason is simple: editing on-wiki distracts me from my scientific research, and this is something I can not afford. Good luck in the ocean of life! ] (]) 12:13, 20 June 2012 (UTC) | ||
| *You offered sound advice. I should never have gone there, but I'm out now. Thanks. --<small>] ]</small> 02:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Let's just wait and see what arbs decide. They are rather unpredictable, I think. ] (]) 02:16, 22 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
| {| class="messagebox talk" | |||
| | style="padding-right: 0.5em;" | ] | |||
| | '''My very best wishes''' is taking a ] for his academic commitments. | |||
| |} | |||
Revision as of 03:59, 22 June 2012
Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages.
| “ | Ships that pass in the night, and speak each other in passing, only a signal shown, and a distant voice in the darkness; So on the ocean of life, we pass and speak one another, only a look and a voice, then darkness again and a silence. (Henry Wadsworth Longfellow) | ” |
- Take care. Hopefully you will be back ;) Homunculus (duihua) 23:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- I am trying to stop editing here for a long time. There are many reasons for leaving , but main reason is simple: editing on-wiki distracts me from my scientific research, and this is something I can not afford. Good luck in the ocean of life! My very best wishes (talk) 12:13, 20 June 2012 (UTC)