This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Canterbury Tail (talk | contribs) at 16:52, 20 January 2025 (→Removal of valuable information on molecule editor: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 16:52, 20 January 2025 by Canterbury Tail (talk | contribs) (→Removal of valuable information on molecule editor: re)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
User talk:The Banner/Airport vandal
| Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Content (?) |
| ||||||||||
| Conduct (?) |
| ||||||||||
| Deletion (?) |
| ||||||||||
| Enforcement (?) |
| ||||||||||
| Editing (?) |
| ||||||||||
| Project content (?) |
| ||||||||||
| WMF (?) |
| ||||||||||
 | Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back. |
Part 1: Old archives, organised per year.
Part 2: Current archives, organised per month
 Archives |
|
Archive 2011, Archive 2012, Archive 2013, Archive 2014, Archive 2015, Archive 2016, Archive 2017, Archive 2018, Archive 2019, Archive 2020, Archive 2021, Archive 2022, Archive 2023 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 6 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of health insurance chief executive officers in the United States on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
The Signpost: 15 January 2025
- From the editors: Looking back, looking forward
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2024
- In the media: Will you be targeted?
- Technology report: New Calculator template brings interactivity at last
- Opinion: Reflections one score hence
- Serendipity: What we've left behind, and where we want to go next
- Arbitration report: Analyzing commonalities of some contentious topics
Removal of valuable information on molecule editor
Hello @The Banner, I noticed that you recently removed a number of software listings from the Molecule editor page, stating that they were not notable. Some of the removed software, such as Biovia Sketch and ChimeraX, are widely used and highly notable in the field. The value of this page lies in being a highly technical and comprehensive list, striving for completeness. An incomplete list reduces its usefulness to readers, especially those in research and industry who rely on such references. Could you clarify the reasoning behind the removal? If there are concerns about notability, perhaps we can discuss them and look for sources to support their inclusion. I believe this information is valuable to readers, and I would appreciate it if we could find a way to address any issues while preserving relevant content. Best regards, Davidoskky (talk) 15:13, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages is not endless list of packages as that can bite with WP:SPAM. A valid selection criterion (WP:CSC) is that a package has its own article on the English language Misplaced Pages. With the existence of an article, it can easily be proven that a package is notable and fit to include in a list. In short: to include an package in the list, Write The Article First. The Banner talk 15:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- Even including all existing software the list would not be very long, I doubt it could be considered spam under any definition of the term. The page is highly technical and maintained by experts. Any useless reference would quickly be removed. You are degrading (and quite severely) the quality of that page with no specific knowledge of the topic.
- If you wish to cut out software that is not deemed relevant, please ask someone who knows something regarding that kind of software before indiscriminately removing items of high significance, I guess you could contact someone working on the computational chemistry part of the wiki.
- Regarding writing a page about those software, can sure be done, but I'd rather do what is actually useful to me and other people working in the field rather than wasting time writing pages nobody will ever actually read.
- In order to retain the usefulness of the page, it would be nice if you could revert your edit. Davidoskky (talk) 16:06, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- I support The Banner's edit, if the software hasn't been proven to be notable it shouldn't be included. First step to getting them included that would be much more helpful than just having a link on the Wiki page that goes nowhere would be to actually create the article for the software. If the article is created, and passes our WP:Notability standards, then it can be added to the list. Canterbury Tail talk 16:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)